Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

MILITARY MANOEUVRES, 1928.

MILITARY MANŒUVRES ACTS, 1897 AND 1911 (ORDER IN COUNCIL).

The Treasurer of the Household reported His Majesty's Answer to the Address, as followeth:—
"I have received your Address praying that I will make an Order-in-Council under the Military Manœuvres Acts, 1897 and 1911, a draft of which was presented to your House on the 19th day of March last.
I will comply with your advice."

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Bournemouth Gas and Water Bill [Lords],

As amended, considered; to be read the Third time.

Great Western Railway (Road Transport Bill,

London and North Eastern Railway (Road Transport) Bill,

London, Midland and Scottish Railway (Road Transport) Bill,

As amended, to be considered Tomorrow.

Manchester Ship Canal Bill [Lords],

As amended, considered; to be read the Third time.

Southern Railway (Road Transport) Bill,

As amended, to be considered Tomorrow.

Goldsmid Estate Bill [Lords],

Whitby Water Bill [Lords].

Read a Second time, and committed.

Lincolnshire Rivers Fisheries Provisional Order Bill,

As amended, considered; to be read the Third time To-morrow.

Oral Answers to Questions — INDIA.

NO-TAX CAMPAIGN, BARDOLI TALUKI.

Sir NICHOLAS GRATTAN-DOYLE: 2.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he has any information respecting the no-tax campaign in the Bardoli sub-divisional district of the Bombay Presidency.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Earl Winterton): In July last year, after more than usually careful inquiry and consideration, extending over more than two years, the Government of Bombay fixed the new assessment of the Bardoli Taluka at an average enhancement of 20 per cent. on the old as compared with the 30 per cent. originally proposed by the Settlement Officer. This decision was made the subject of considerable public criticism, and in February last Mr. Vallabhai Patel, President of the Ahmedabad Municipality, opened a no-tax campaign in the Bardoli Taluka which had been the scene of Mr. Ghandi's experiment in civil disobedience in 1921. By methods which have become familiar since that date Mr. Patel has achieved a certain success in defeating the efforts of the officials of Government to collect the revenue, but, despite the interruption of communications caused by the monsoon, the law is being enforced against the tenants who have refused payment and the Government of Bombay are in consultation with the Government of India as to the steps to be taken to deal with the situation and with the gross misrepesentation to which the action of the Bombay Government has been and is being subjected.
I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a fuller statement of the position.

Following is the statement—

The settlement of the land-revenue assessment which has been in force in the Bardoli Taluka of the Surat District in the Bombay Presidency (which has an area of 222 square miles and a population of some 80,000), being due to expire in July last year, the Bombay Government in the ordinary course of their revenue administration appointed an experienced Deputy Collector in the cold weather of 1924–25 to prepare proposals
for a new settlement. The Settlement Officer submitted his report to the Collector of the District in June, 1925, by whom it was passed on in the following November to the Settlement Commissioner, who in his turn forwarded it to the Commissioner of the Division in May, 1926. The Report reached the local Government in August, 1926, about a year before the new settlement was due to take effect. The result of the examination and re-examination by the officials mentioned was that the proposals of the Settlement Officer for an average increase of 30 per cent. of the current assessment were reduced by 1 per cent. to 29 per cent.

Meanwhile, as the result of publication for criticism of the Settlement Officer's report in the Taluka, objections to the proposals began to be received from the persons affected and continued throughout the year 1926, and in February, 1927, steps were taken to ventilate them in the Bombay Legislative Council, with the result that the member of the Governor's Executive Council in charge of the Revenue Department received in March, 1927, a deputation of agriculturists from the Bardoli Taluka and from the adjoining Taluka of Chorasi (which was also under resettlement), headed by two members of the Legislative Council. As it transpired that the deputation, though purporting to be fully representative and having had several months in which to prepare their case, were not fully armed with figures in support of their contention that the proposed reassessment was excessive, they were given time to produce these, and occupied two months in the process, and the documents containing them were thereupon sent to the Settlement Commissioner for investigation. In July, 1927, the local Government, having fully investigated the original report, with the criticisms of the Settlement Officer's superior officers upon it, the original petitions of complaint, and the case submitted by the deputation with the Settlement Commissioner's recommendation upon it, passed orders the effect of which was to fix the new assessment at an average enhancement of 20 per cent. on the old, as compared with the 30 per cent. originally proposed by the Settlement Officer. This was in July last year.

Thus the Bombay Government satisfied themselves, after a more than ordinarily careful and prolonged scutiny of the facts and circumstances, that the assessment finally adopted erred, if at all, on the side of leniency, and that its adoption would not prove burdensome to the inhabitants of the area. It should be borne in mind that, along with the resettlement of Bardoli, proposals were made and approved for the resettlement of the Chorasi Taluka which adjoins Bardoli and the conditions in which are precisely similar. The new settlement of the Chorasi Taluka is at a slightly higher rate than that of Bardoli, but at Chorasi no serious objection has been raised, and nine-tenths of the newly-assessed land revenue due from Chorasi have already been realised in the ordinary course.

In February, 1928, Mr. Vallabhai Patel, the President of the Ahmedabad Municipality, who had embarked on the enterprise of organising opposition to the new Bardoli settlement, presented the Bombay Government with an ultimatum to the effect that unless they consented to re-open the matter and to institute a fresh inquiry he would advise the inhabitants to withhold, not merely the enhanced demand, but all payments of land revenue, and demanded compliance within a week. This demand the Bombay Government naturally declined to meet, whereupon Mr. Patel launched, with the aid of numerous friends and helpers, a systematic campaign, first to secure the withholding of payments due and secondly to thwart the legal consequences of default. By the middle of March it became clear that these efforts were successfully frustrating the first steps ordinarily taken in such cases by the revenue authorities—namely, the service of demand notices and the attachment of cattle and other movable property, whereupon the Bombay Government decided to exercise the powers given them by the Land Revenue Code to forfeit occupancies and to dispose of land so forfeited to other persons, lands held by non-cultivating owners—moneylenders and others—being selected as the first objects of this policy. This process took time, and meanwhile Mr. Patel and his lieutenants were able to consolidate their position so that by the middle of April they had established a tyranny in the taluka, compelling the inhabitants to
remain along with the cattle within their houses with locked doors to prevent seizure and attachment, and bringing extreme pressure in the shape of fine, threats and boycott both upon any who showed a disposition to pay and also upon the subordinate revenue staff and village servants, if they refused to default in their duties. These methods were countered by the Government by the importation of fresh subordinate staff, and by the middle of May 1,600 acres of land had been forfeited and transferred to fresh tenants on the payment of occupancy price. Further, up to the end of May about 1¼ lakhs of land revenue had been realised out of the 6¼ due under the new assessment.

Faced with the failure of their campaign, Mr. Patel and his friends then endeavoured to enlist all the resources of the Indian National Congress organisation throughout the country, and a little later several members of the Bombay Legislative Council resigned their seats to mark their sympathy. Meanwhile, with the arrival of the monsoon, communications in the taluka are as usual at that period interrupted. But the forfeiture of defaulters' occupancies continues, and arrests and convictions are taking place where the law is being broken. The Government of Bombay are in consultation with the Government of India as to the steps to be taken to deal with the situation, and with the gross misrepresentation to which the action of the Bombay Government has been and is being subjected. Up to date the amount of land revenue is Rs.1,38,000 and the amount still outstanding is Rs.4,84,000.

ARMY (ORGANISATION AND EQUIPMENT).

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: 3.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether an inquiry has been held into the equipment and general preparedness for war of the Army in India; and whether, as a result of that inquiry, any changes are contemplated?

Earl WINTERTON: Yes, Sir. The Government of India, in close consultation with His Majesty's Government, are constantly examining the problem of improving the organisation and equipment of the Army in India so far as may be necessary to make good any
deficiencies and to give it the benefit of the latest modern developments to bring it into line with the British Army in this country. As regards the second part, I presume my hon. Friend refers to statements that have recently appeared in the "Pioneer" newspaper to the effect that a change in the chief command in India may shortly be expected. There is no foundation whatever for such a statement, and I am glad to take this opportunity of assuring the House that the Commander-in-Chief in India enjoys the full confidence of the Government of India and of His Majesty's Government.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: Is it the case that this question was raised in the Indian Legislative Assembly and that the Government of India are in a state of anxiety; and will the Noble Lord take steps to put an end to these mischievous statements in the newspapers?

Earl WINTERTON: I regret to say that this is not the first occasion on which the newspaper in question has published wholly inaccurate statements. It seems to share the tendency of the less reputable sections of the Indian Press whose main object is to discredit the Government of India by making misleading and inaccurate statements. My Noble Friend has taken all steps possible to have these constant untruthful rumours disproved.

BRITISH OFFICERS (PENSIONS).

Mr. L'ESTRANGE MALONE: 4.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India the amount paid annually in pensions to British officers in the Indian civil and military services: and whether these pensions are chargeable to Indian revenues?

Earl WINTERTON: No separate record is kept of the amount paid in pensions to British, as distinct from Indian officers. The total payments in respect of pensions in this country during 1927–28 amounted to £3,509,438, of which approximately £75,000 has been or will be recovered from the Imperial Government or other employers in respect of the service of officers lent to them. The remainder is chargeable to Indian revenues.

PALESTINE (PRISONERS).

Colonel WEDGWOOD: 6.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many persons sentenced in Palestine for being in possession of Communist literature have been sentenced to deportation as well as imprisonment; and whether this additional punishment is inflicted in other cases where the same term of imprisonment is involved?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Ormsby-Gore): I am unable to furnish the information asked for without reference to Palestine. My right hon. Friend is asking the High Commissioner for a report.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Is this exceptional attitude towards Communism in Palestine due to inspiration from the Colonial Office here, or to obscurantism on the part of the local Government?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: It is not due to either. It is due to the necessities of Palestine.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: 7.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will see that, if Hogging takes place in Palestinian gaols, it shall only be for such offences as are punishable by flogging in gaols in this country?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I will consult the High Commissioner for Palestine on the suggestion made in the question.

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS (FILM QUOTA BILL).

Viscount SANDON: 8.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what new circumstances arose to cause the abandonment of the Film Quota Bill in the Singapore legislature which were not in existence when it was introduced?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: No new circumstances have arisen, but the Government of the Straits Settlements, in reconsidering their draft Bill in the light of the Imperial Act recently passed on the subject, felt that similar legislation in the Straits Settlements would be premature. Their principal reasons were that the supply of British films is at present inadequate, and that American films have no monopoly in the Straits Settlements.

MALAY STATES (WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION).

Mr. WELLOCK: 9.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the nature of the changes in the revised draft of the Malay States Workmen's Compensation Bill?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Only slight alterations were made in the revised draft, and these were not of substance, but of detail. If the hon. Member desires it, I shall be glad to supply him with the text of the Amendments.

Mr. WELLOCK: 10.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the revised Workmen's Compensation Bill in the Malay States has yet been passed; and, if not, whether he can give the reasons for the delay?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply returned to him on the 4th July, to which I am not able to add anything at present.

Mr. WELLOCK: Cannot information be obtained in regard to this matter? I have raised it on two or three occasions within the last 12 months. Will the right hon. Gentleman see if any definite steps are being taken?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: As soon as we learn what the Federated Malay States Government intend to do and when they propose to bring the matter before the Federal Council, I shall communicate with the hon. Member.

EMPIRE SETTLEMENT.

Mr. COUPER: 11.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs what directions have been drafted for the purpose of the impending visit to Canada, Australia and New Zealand of the Undersecretary of State for Dominion Affairs; whether he has been empowered to enter into any fresh migration agreements; and whether such schemes as the pioneer-settlement scheme in Canada are being held up until the conclusion of his tour?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: No, Sir; no special directions have been drafted, but Lord Lovat hopes to discuss all matters relating to oversea settlement with the authorities and with representatives of private organisations in the Dominions
which he is visiting, and to negotiate such further extensions of the present policy as may appear feasible. It is not intended that any schemes should be held up until the conclusion of his tour.

Mr. COUPER: Will consideration be extended to the recommendations of the Industrial Transference Board?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I think all cognate subjects relating to the problem of migration will come under review.

IRISH GRANTS COMMITTEE.

Colonel HOWARD-BURY: 12.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs the number of cases that have been heard by the Irish Grants Committee, and the number of cases that yet remain to be heard; and when it is expected that the work of the Committee will be completed?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: 2,338 cases have been considered by the Irish Grants Committee, and approximately 1,790 cases remain to be heard. It is expected that the work of the Committee will be completed during the early portion of next year.

Colonel HOWARD-BURY: In view of the progress which has been made, can the right hon. Gentleman now say whether the £1,000,000 will be sufficient to meet all these recommendations?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I must have notice of that question.

Oral Answers to Questions — AGRICULTURE.

WAGES ACT (PROSECUTIONS).

Mr. R. YOUNG: 14.
asked the Minister of Agriculture the number of prosecutions under the Agricultural Wages Act for under-payment of agreed county rates to agricultural workers during the years 1925, 1926, and 1927, and to 30th June 1928, respectively; and the aggregate amount of such under-payments in each year, with the amount of fines imposed during the same periods?

The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Guinness): With the hon. Members permission, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement giving the particulars desired.

Mr. YOUNG: How are these discrepancies found out? Is it done by inspectors?

Mr. GUINNESS: We have inspectors who look into any suspected cases and who also make test inspections.

Following is the statement:

The following statement gives particulars of PROSECUTIONS under the AGRICULTURAL WAGES (REGULATION) ACT, 1924, for failure to pay wages at not less than the minimum rates.


Year.
No. of Prosecutions.
Arrears of wages ordered by the Courts.
Fines.




£
£


1925
32
282
106


1926
87
1,625
347


1927
94
2,288
271


1928 (first six months)
46
841
129

LAND SALES.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: 15.
asked the Minister of Agriculture how many acres of agricultural land changed hands in Great Britain during the year 1927, the number of separate holdings involved, and their total cost?

Mr. GUINNESS: I regret that I have no information which would enable me to reply to the hon Member's question.

Mr. WILLIAMS: Is it not possible to obtain such information; and, in view of the Bill which comes up for discussion tomorrow, will the right hon. Gentleman not endeavour to obtain it?

Mr. GUINNESS: We could not obtain that information without statutory authority, and, obviously, it would entail considerable cost and inconvenience.

Mr. WILLIAMS: Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that it is the duty of the Government to collect such information; and on what will the right hon. Gentleman base his arguments tomorrow if the information is not available?

Mr. GUINNESS: I see no reason for harassing those who buy or sell land with unnecessary forms.

COAL INDUSTRY (BOYS).

Mr. BATEY: 17.
asked the Secretary for Mines the number of boys under 18 years of age employed in the coal mines of Great Britain during the years 1925 and 1927, respectively, and the number of shifts worked by them during the same years?

The SECRETARY for MINES (Commodore Douglas King): It is estimated that in 1925 the average number of boys under 18 years of age employed at mines under the Coal Mines Act was 120,500, and in 1927 101,150. The estimated total number of shifts worked was 30¼ million in 1925, and 24⅔ million in 1927.

Mr. BATEY: Is that a list of those under 18, or of total shifts, including everybody?

Commodore KING: The hon. Member asked me about those under 18, and that is what I have given.

BATING BELIEF.

Sir HUGH LUCAS-TOOTH: 19.
asked the Minister of Health whether, in the case of a local authority carrying on or contributing to a land drainage scheme at the expense of the general ratepayer, he intends to de-rate agricultural land in respect of such a rate?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): The intention is that the occupiers of agricultural land shall be relieved of any rate thereon which is a rate within the definition in Section 68 of the Bating and Valuation Act, 1925. This definition excludes the ordinary drainage rates, but in the special cases where local authorities incur expenditure in connection with land drainage works which is chargeable through such a rate on the general body of ratepayers, the occupiers of agricultural land will be relieved.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Do I understand that in the case of special drainage at the expense of local authorities the landowners who get the benefit of that expenditure are to contribute not one penny to the expenditure involved?

Sir K. WOOD: I should hesitate to assent to that proposition. Perhaps the right hon. and gallant Member will look
at my answer, which is of rather a technical nature.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Is the law being changed in such a way that the beneficiaries who are at present liable to contribute by a special rate on agricultural land will no longer have to contribute?

Sir K. WOOD: The change, if any, is as is stated in my reply. It is difficult to deal with this matter by question and answer, and no doubt the right hon. and gallant Member will seek a further opportunity to raise the question on the Report stage of the Bill.

Mr. MONTAGUE: Is it not a fact that under the block grant the additional cost of any such schemes will have to be borne entirely by the rest of the ratepayers?

Sir K. WOOD: It has nothing to do with a block grant; that is dealt with in the second part of the Government Rating proposals as contained in the White Paper.

Mr. LOOKER: 20.
asked the Minister of Health whether property and premises used for horticultural and glass-house purposes will be freed from all rates under the rating proposals of the Government?

Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend is advised that the definition of "agricultural land" contained in Clause 2 of the Bating and Valuation (Apportionment) Bill includes horticultural land, and that the definition of "agricultural buildings" contained in the same Clause includes both (i) glass-houses occupied together with agricultural land and (ii) glass-houses not occupied together with agricultural land, if such glass-houses are themselves market gardens.

Mr. LOOKER: Do I understand from the right hon. Gentleman's reply that his answer is in the affirmative?

Sir K. WOOD: I would invite my hon. Friend to look carefully at the reply, which was carefully prepared.

Mr. HARRIS: Will a glass-house in the London area or in a big town be exempted from rates if used for horticultural purposes?

Sir K. WOOD: It depends whether it comes within the definition under this Clause.

Mr. W. THORNE: Is a glass-house used for producing tomatoes within the definition.

Sir K. WOOD: Yes, I think it certainly would come within the definition.

Mr. HURD: When is a glass-house a market garden and when is it not?

Sir K. WOOD: My hon. Friend should, I think, put that question to my hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General.

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSING.

RURAL DISTRICTS (BYE-LAWS).

Mr. HURD: 21.
asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to a unanimous resolution of the Conference of Rural District Councils of England and Wales urging that, seeing the unsuitable character of domestic buildings being erected in the country districts, rural district councils should be given fuller powers of control and prevention than is permitted by the model bye-laws; and whether he will take steps to secure the needed alteration in these model bye-laws?

Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend is aware of the resolution and proposes to confer with the Rural District Councils' Association on the subject.

EX-SEKVICE MEN, DUNDRUM, COUNTY DUBLIN.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL: 53.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, with regard to the housing estate at Dundrum, County Dublin, which was set up under the Irish Land (Provision for Sailors and Soldiers) Act, 1919, whether the question of permitting ex-service men resident on that estate to purchase their houses has at any time been considered?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Arthur Michael Samuel): Under paragraph 13 of the Irish Sailors' and Soldiers' Land Trust (Amending) Regulations, 1925, the Trust may, with the approval of the Treasury, make schemes enabling the tenants to purchase the freehold or leasehold of the houses occupied by them. No schemes have yet been made, but I understand that the matter is at present under the consideration of the Trust.

Sir F. HALL: Seeing that this Act was passed in 1919, does the hon. Member not think that by this time some measure should have been taken to enable these ex-service men to purchase their houses?

Mr. SAMUEL: I have just said that I understand that the matter is under consideration.

Sir F. HALL: Has the Financial Secretary noticed that this Act dates from 1919, and can anything be done to assist these men?

Mr. SAMUEL: Everything that can be done to expedite the consideration of the matter will be done, and I have no doubt is being done.

Sir F. HALL: Will steps be taken to expedite the matter?

Mr. SAMUEL: I will convey my hon. and gallant Friend's request to the proper quarter.

SCHEME, FILEY (DOORS).

Mr. LUMLEY: 18.
(for Lieut.-Colonel LAMBERT WARD) asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to the action of the Filey Urban District Council who are insisting that Swedish doors only shall be used in the Scarborough Road housing scheme; and whether he will secure equal treatment for home manufactured materials in schemes on which a subsidy is paid?

Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend received on the 4th July a letter making representations on this point and has asked the local authority for their observations.

LONDON LOCK HOSPITAL.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: 22.
asked the Minister of Health how many meetings have taken place of the committee appointed by him last March to inquire into the management, administration, and staffing of the London Lock Hospital, with special reference to the arrangements for the medical treatment of patients, and for their moral, social, and material welfare; and whether he can indicate when the Report is likely to be forthcoming?

Sir K. WOOD: I understand that the committee have held six meetings and have in addition visited a number of institutions. I am informed that the
inquiry is approaching completion but that the committee are not yet able to say when they will conclude their labours.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: If I put down a question immediately before the rising of Parliament, will the right hon. Gentleman be able to give me a date then?

Sir K. WOOD: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will take that course. I am not able, of course, to give him a definite reply.

TELEPHONE SERVICE.

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: 23.
asked the Postmaster-General whether he will give particulars showing how the amount of £120,000 is spent annually in bringing to the notice of the public the advantages of the telephone service and the facilities offered to subscribers?

The ASSISTANT POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Viscount Wolmer): New business is sought chiefly by personal canvassing conducted by a specially trained staff of over 500 men, and the wages and commission paid to them account for the bulk of the £120,000. The work of the canvassing staff is supplemented by the distribution throughout the country of pamphlets, leaflets and other advertising literature and by the exhibition of posters in post offices and elsewhere. In addition, telephone exhibits have been arranged at industrial fairs and exhibitions in London and the Provinces. The cost of printing and delivering the advertising literature or of the telephone exhibits could not be ascertained without considerable difficulty and expense, but its estimated cost is included in the sum quoted.

Captain STREATFEILD: Does not the Noble Lord consider that a great deal more business might be done in this line if special facilities could be afforded to the farming community, especially in the outlying districts of Scotland?

Viscount WOLMER: That is rather a different question. As my hon. and gallant Friend knows, we do give telephones in country districts at unremunerative rates. I know that my agricultural friends would like those rates
to be still lower, and the Postmaster-General desires that they should be as low as possible, but that is rather a big question.

Captain STREATFEILD: Is my Noble Friend aware that those facilities given to the agricultural community are at residential rates and not at business rates?

Mr. SPEAKER: That is not raised by the question on the Paper.

CROWN AND SUBJECT (LITIGATION).

Rear-Admiral BEAMISH: 24.
asked the Attorney-General whether the committee set up in 1921 to investigate and report upon matters bearing on litigation as between Crown and subject has made a report; whether any draft Bill has been prepared; and can he hold out hopes of early legislation?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 48.
asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce the Bill prepared by the Committee appointed to investigate the position of the Crown as a litigant?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir Thomas Inskip): The terms of reference of the Committee to which my hon. Friend refers were altered in 1924; the Committee reported in February of last year under its altered terms of reference, and their Report was presented to Parliament in April of that year and is Command Paper No. 2842. The Report is largely composed of a draft Bill. I cannot hold out any hope of early legislation upon the subject.

Sir WILLIAM DAVISON: Do the Government recognise the great urgency of getting this matter attended to? Is it not a practically non-contentious matter, and could not a short Bill dealing with it be brought forward with the consent of all parties?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: The Government certainly recognise the importance of the question, but, if my hon. Friend will make inquiries, I think he will find that it is far from being a non-contentious matter.

Oral Answers to Questions — UNEMPLOYMENT.

TRANSFERENCE OF WORKERS (MINERS).

Mr. R. YOUNG: 25.
asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that Mr. William Hazelby was sent to London by the Nantyglo Employment Exchange, was met by officials and conducted to the Brixton Employment Exchange, where a job as sandwich-board carrier was offered him; will he say who pays the expense; what was the cost of such transference; and why this job was not given to an unemployed man in London?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of LABOUR (Mr. Betterton): Mr. Hazelby came to London under the arrangements which were explained in a reply to the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley last week. Pending more permanent employment being found for him he was offered work as a sandwich-board man, which he stated he was willing to try. Employment as a painter's labourer was found for him later in the week, which he was to take up to-day. Mr. Hazelby's fare was £l 0s. 3d., of which he will be liable to repay 126. 2d. by instalments, the balance being paid from the Unemployment Fund. The job of painter's labourer was offered to him under the arrangements to which I have already referred.

Mr. YOUNG: Will the hon. Gentleman say whether this man has lost any benefit, and will he answer the last part of my question?

Mr. BETTERTON: He has lost no benefit at all. When he gave up the job of sandwichman, which he did after a very few hours, he was paid benefit to the end of the week, and he lost no benefit at all. I am not sure whether the hon. Member is referring to the job of painter's labourer or to the job of sandwichman, but, so far as I know, there was no application for the job of sandwichman.

Mr. YOUNG: Is it not a fact that it is not necessary to make application for the job of sandwichman?

Mr. BETTERTON: The job of sandwichman is rather different from other jobs. This man was not deprived of benefit because he did not take it.

Mr. BARKER: Does the Parliamentary Secretary approve of bringing miners
150 miles to carry sandwich boards and then leaving them stranded because they refuse such a degrading occupation? Is this done with the authority of the Minister?

Mr. SPEAKER: It is not a question of the approval or otherwise of the Parliamentary Secretary.

Mr. BARKER: On a point of Order. Am I not allowed to elucidate this point by a supplementary question?

Mr. SPEAKER: Anything bearing on the answer given by the Parliamentary Secretary can be elucidated by a supplementary question, but not matters of opinion.

Mr. MONTAGUE: Will the right hon. Gentleman accept my word that I will find him 200 painters' labourers out of work in London?

Mr. BETTERTON: I will accept the hon. Member's word for anything he cares to tell me, but, even so, in my view and in that of my right hon. Friend, it is only right that unemployed miners congregated in large numbers in congested areas, where there is no work at all, should have an opportunity of having these jobs.

Mr. KELLY: Is this new policy of giving miners jobs in this way the result of the recommendations of the Transference Board?

Mr. BETTERTON: The question of the publication of the Report of the Transference Board is still under consideration, and I must ask the hon. Member to await the decision.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Will the hon. Gentleman be prepared to lay upon the Table or in the Library the instructions which his Department has sent to managers of Employment Exchanges in industrial areas requiring them to take as many as 10 single miners from these starving areas for stated periods of one week?

Mr. BETTERTON: That question is identical in form with one which is down in the name of the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) to-morrow, when I will answer it.

Lieut.-Colonel WATTS-MORGAN: Will the hon. Gentleman say why all these miners, who have not had employment
for more than a week, have been brought down from the mining areas, and will the number be given in the Report?

Mr. BETTERTON: I must ask the hon. and gallant Member to be good enough to wait until a decision has been arrived at in regard to the publication of the Report.

Captain GARRO-JONES: To what extent is this principle being acted upon that unemployed men outside London should be brought in to fill these jobs, when thousands of men have been unemployed in London for many years?

Mr. BETTERTON: If the hon. and gallant Gentleman means how many men are being placed, roughly speaking, in pusuance of the policy to which I have referred, it was at least 100 last week.

Mr. PALING: In view of the fact that the recommendations of the Transference Board are being put into operation before the publication of the Report, may I ask when we are likely to have it?

Mr. BETTERTON: That is a question which was addressed to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister the other day, and he expects shortly to be able to give an answer. I understand that there is a question on this very point to-day.

Mr. PALING: Is it too much to ask that it should be published, and should it not have been published some time ago in view of the fact that the recommendations have been put into operation?

Mr. BETTERTON: That is the question which I understand is on the Paper to-day.

JUVENILES (GUIDE).

Mr. KELLY: 26.
asked the Minister of Labour whether it is the intention of his Department to arrange for the issue to the public of the book prepared by his Department and the Juvenile Advisory Council as a guide to employment for boys and girls; and will this book be available to Members of the House of Commons?

Mr. BETTERTON: The "Guide to Employment for London Boys and Girls," compiled by the London Advisory Council for Juvenile Employment, to which no doubt the hon. Member's question refers, has now been issued as a sale publication by the Stationery Office at the price
of 2s. Members can obtain a copy by applying to the Controller, His Majesty's Stationery Office, in the usual way.

Mr. KELLY: Is there any possibility of this book being published at a cheaper price than 2s., and will the attention of the people engaged in the various industries be called to this publication?

Mr. BETTERTON: The first supplementary question should be addressed to the Treasury. With regard to the second, I have read the Report, and it is a publication of the greatest possible value, and I hope that the utmost possible publicity will be given to it.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

SMALL HOLDINGS, SCARRISTAVEG.

Mr. MACLEAN: 27.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the area of land which has been acquired on the farm of Scarristaveg for the purpose of forming small holdings and enlarging existing holdings?

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): The area of land on which it is proposed to constitute new holdings and enlargements of existing holdings comprises the whole farm of Scarristaveg, and extends to 1,682 acres or thereby.

Mr. MACLEAN: 28.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if the new small holdings and enlargements of existing holdings on Scarristaveg farm have yet been allocated; and, if so, to whom?

Sir J. GILMOUR: The allocation of new holdings and enlargements of existing holdings from the farm of Scarristaveg has not yet been completed, but the proprietor's proposals, to which I have agreed, are that the enlargement will be shared by the holders in the adjoining township of Northton, and that the new holdings will be assigned to Miss Hannah Macleay, Mr. John Macleod and Mr. John McCuish.

Mr. MACLEAN: Can the right hon. Gentleman inform the House how many years the three persons who have received the new holdings have had their applications before the Board?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I cannot without notice

Mr. MACLEAN: Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that, when these three new holdings were being allocated, the claims of two men who have had their applications in since as far back as 1912 ought to have been considered favourably?

Sir J. GILMOUR: No, Sir; these claims are submitted to the proprietor, and the proprietor has a right of expressing a view in the matter.

Mr. MACLEAN: Are we to understand that the Scottish Board of Agriculture have no right, if the proprietor says that certain individuals are to go upon the holding, and that their list of applicants is not to be considered at all?

Sir J. GILMOUR: The hon. Gentleman has been repeatedly informed that this scheme is one which the Board of Agriculture cannot enforce, and it must be done voluntarily with the assent of the proprietor.

Mr. MACLEAN: Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to send me particulars of the arrangement that has been entered into between the proprietor of this estate and the Scottish Office?

Sir J. GILMOUR: Until the whole scheme has been completed it is not possible to supply full details, but the hon. Gentleman can put down a further question.

Mr. MACLEAN: The right hon. Gentleman has already informed the House that the new holdings have been allocated, and that they have been allocated according to the wishes of the proprietor: I wish to know if he can give the terms of the arrangement by which these new holdings have been allocated?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I have told the hon. Member the terms on which they have been allocated.

LAND SEIZURE (PROSECUTIONS, LOCHMADDY).

Mr. MACLEAN: 29.
asked the Lord Advocate the number of days served in prison by Neil Macdonald and Ewan Maclennan before their release was ordered by the Court of Session?

Sir J. GILMOUR: These men served 13 days' imprisonment from the date of their sentence till the date when interim liberation was ordered by the Court of Session.

Mr. SHINWELL: Has it now been definitely established that these men were illegally detained?

Sir J. GILMOUR: No, the matter is under appeal.

Mr. SHINWELL: Has not the Court of Session already decided that they were illegally detained, and have expressed a view accordingly?

Sir J. GILMOUR: No, Sir.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Is it not the case that the Court of Session ordered the release of these men?

Sir J. GILMOUR: It is quite true that they ordered their release, but they did not decide the question which was before them.

Mr. SPEAKER: Colonel Howard-Bury.

Mr. MACLEAN: rose
——

Mr. SPEAKER: I have called upon the next question. The hon. Gentleman has had a full share of the time for questions.

Mr. MACLEAN: I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman——

Mr. SPEAKER: We cannot go back now.

ITALY (FRONTIER TRAFFIC REGULATIONS).

Colonel HOWARD-BURY: 30.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the names of the 30 passes that are open to tourists and climbers along the Swiss-Italian frontier, and which are the passes and mountains which are forbidden territory?

The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Austen Chamberlain): I doubt the use of supplying the hon. and gallant Member with the list of those passes which were open last September, as I do not know that this list is still accurate and complete,
but I am asking His Majesty's Ambassador at Rome whether the Italian Government would be willing to supply him with a complete up-to-date list of all those passes on the Swiss-Italian frontier which are at present open. Meanwhile, I can but repeat the suggestion my right hon. Friend made in answer to a question on the 25th of June, namely, that British subjects in Switzerland who contemplate an ascent which may take them across the frontier would be well advised to ascertain from the nearest Italian Consular Officer whether the route which they propose to follow is open.

CHINA (BRITISH CLAIMS).

Mr. LOOKER: 31.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the retiring Chinese Northern troops carried off 6,000 goods wagons and 300 locomotives, practically half of the rolling-stock of the railways north of the Yangtse; that two British firms are owed over £1,000,000 for rolling-stock towards which nothing has been paid since 1922; and that large sums of money are also owed to British firms for railway material; and can he state what steps he proposes to take to protect the British interests concerned?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I have no information regarding the first part of my hon. Friend's question. As regards the second and third parts, his information is substantially correct. Constant efforts have been made by His Majesty's Minister in the past to secure the payment of these debts by the Chinese authorities, but, owing to the fact that the railways are the chief instruments of the civil war, it is impossible to expect any result until some form of unified control emerges. Nevertheless, His Majesty's Minister's efforts to secure payment of these commercial debts will not be relaxed.

Mr. LOOKER: Will the right hon. Gentleman have inquiries made as to the truth or otherwise of the statements in the first part of the question, and make any representations where it is considered necessary?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I know they have carried off a great deal of the rolling stock, though I cannot say exactly what proportion, but I do not think that inquiries would help us at the present time.

OUTLAWRY OF WAR.

Mr. THURTLE: 32.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is yet in a position to state when His Majesty's Government intends to sign the American Peace Pact?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir. Everything possible is, however, being done to hasten the despatch of a reply to the latest note from the Government of the United States of America.

Mr. THURTLE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Government's procrastination in this matter has caused considerable disappointment throughout the country, and does he not see the need, for the good repute of this country, of signing this Pact at the earliest possible moment.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: That would appear to be rather an expression of opinion than of fact, but in my view it is more important that His Majesty's Government should be careful when undertaking new engagements not to break their old ones than to proceed without reference to the serious nature of the questions involved.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Is there any truth in the telegram from Paris this morning that Great Britain and France are to sign the Treaty and couple it with a protocol embodying reservations? Further, is it not a fact that our Dominions are prepared to sign without any protocol or reservation?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I am not prepared to answer without notice as to the attitude of the Dominions, as to which I am not yet fully informed—our consultations with them are by no means complete—and I think it would be convenient that I should postpone any account of the British reply, or the likely character of the British reply, until I am in a position to lay Papers.

Mr. THURTLE: Can the right hon. Gentleman give us an approximate date when His Majesty's Government are likely to sign the Treaty?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot say. All I can undertake is that there shall be no unnecessary loss of time.

Mr. THURTLE: I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

Mr. SAKLATVALA: Will the right hon. Gentleman inform the House whether during these negotiations he is taking any steps to stop America herself from carrying on her war with Nicaragua?

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

RUSSIAN OIL (IMPORTS).

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: 33.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what quantity of oil was imported into this country from Russia during the year 1927 and for the six months ended 30th June, 1928?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Herbert Williams): During the year 1927 the imports of refined petroleum from Russia were 93,054,000 gallons; during the first five months of this year they were 44,973,000 gallons. Figures for last June are not at present available.

ARGENTINE (RAILWAY RATES).

Mr. LOOKER: 34.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the Argentine Government is proposing to give effect to the provisions of the Mitre law, which prescribes the rates of freight which shall be charged on the Argentine railways in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the British investors concerned; and will he call for a Report on the matter?

Mr. DOUGLAS HACKING (Secretary, Overseas Trade Department): I have no official information on this matter, but if my hon. Friend will supply me with any information in his possession I will consider it.

HOSIERY LATCH NEEDLES.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: 35.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the increasing importation of hosiery latch needles; and if he will give the figures of such imports for the years 1926 and 1927 and for the first five months of this year?

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: The imports of hosiery latch needles, by weight, were 51,910 lbs. in 1926, 57,717 lbs. in 1927 and 28,393 lbs. in the first five months of the present year.

Mr. WARDLAW-MILNE: In view of the ever-increasing importations of these needles, a key industry in this country, and in view of the fact that the Committee which has already sat has recommended an increased duty, will the hon. Gentleman see that the necessity for this duty is again brought to the notice of the Government?

Oral Answers to Questions — GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS.

CLEARING OFFICE FOR ENEMY DEBTS.

Mr. KELLY: 36.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has received more than one memorandum from members of the Enemy Debts Department asking for inquiry into one aspect and another of the administration of the Department; and, if so, what action was taken in each case?

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: Besides the memorandum which has been the subject of the hon. Member's previous questions, a few complaints have been received in the past in regard to the conduct of the Clearing Office. These were fully investigated at the time and suitable action was taken as necessary.

Mr. KELLY: Does the statement that "suitable action was taken" mean that the charges were not proved and that the people did not have any punishment for what are termed the misdeeds mentioned in the charges?

Mr. WILLIAMS: I do not think anything in the nature of grave charges have been made at any time. I have in mind one case in which two members of the staff were admonished for doing something which was thought to be undesirable.

CHILDREN AND POLICE DIVISIONS, HOME OFFICE (WOMEN).

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: 43.
asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that, excluding the inspectorate, there are no women either in the children's division or in the police division of the Home Office; and whether, in view of the desirability of associating women with this work, he will take steps when future vacancies occur to secure the appointment of women by promotion, transfer, or otherwise to responsible posts in these divisions?

The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir William Joynson-Hicks): I assume the hon. Member refers to the administrative staff, as women are employed on clerical duties in both the divisions referred to as well as in the inspectorate. The administrative staff, as the hon. Member is no doubt aware, is recruited by open competitive examination, for which women are now eligible on the same footing as men, and in the event of a woman being appointed to the Home Office, I would certainly consider employing her in one of the divisions mentioned.

INCOME TAX COLLECTORS.

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: 52.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been called to a recent case of embezzlement and falsification of accounts by a collector of Income Tax in a parish of the City of Westminster; whether he is aware that the collector had to collect about £1,000,000 a year for a remuneration of £750, out of which he had to provide an office, pay a staff, and meet incidental expenses; and whether, having regard to the responsible financial position held by collectors of Income Tax, he will consider making them established civil servants and providing for their offices, staff and expenses out of public funds?

Mr. SAMUEL: I am aware of the facts stated in the question. But I would remind my hon. Friend that the total sum collected by a collector does not in itself afford any reliable index either of his difficulties or of his responsibiity. The largest remittances are usually the simplest to deal with and afford the fewest opportunities
for fraud; and the collector in question had to deal with single payments ranging as high as £250,000. I agree with my hon. Friend that it is desirable to reorganise the collection service by substituting, as far as possible, established civil servants under the Board of Inland Revenue for the existing system. But this is a big operation for which adequate statutory powers do not at present exist. The Board of Inland Revenue are already carrying it out so far as circumstances and the present law permit.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: May I ask the Financial Secretary whether collectors of Income Tax have to provide out of their remuneration an office and staff and meet incidental expenses as stated in the question?

Mr. SAMUEL: I could not answer that question accurately without notice.

Oral Answers to Questions — EDUCATION.

MENTAL DEFICIENCY (REPORT).

Mr. HARRIS: 37.
asked the President of the Board of Education whether he is now in a position to state when the Report of the special committee set up in 1923 to investigate various problems relating to mental deficiency will be ready; and whether it is proposed to issue the Report as a public document?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Duchess of Atholl): My right hon. Friend hopes that the Report will be available before the end of the year and that it will be published but he cannot, of course, give an undertaking at this stage.

JUNIOR SCHOOLS.

Mr. HARRIS: 38.
asked the President of the Board of Education if the Board have in contemplation the reference to the consultative committee, or any other committee that may be set up and the consideration of problems connected with junior schools for children between the age of seven and 11 years, regard being given to the new developments in education foreshadowed in Circular 1397 and the Board's official publication, the New Prospect in Education?

Duchess of ATHOLL: My right hon. Friend has already asked the Consultative Committee to consider a reference on this subject in the following terms:
To inquire and report as to the courses of study suitable for children (other than children in infants' departments) up to the age of eleven in elementary schools, with special reference to the needs of children in rural areas.
I understand that the Committee anticipate being able to begin their consideration of this reference in October next.

LIBRARIES.

Mr. HARRIS: 39.
asked the President of the Board of Education how many libraries under the direct or indirect control of the Board of Education are chargeable to the Education Votes; how many volumes are there in these libraries; whether they are accessible to the members of the teaching profession and the general public; what are the hours of admission for teachers and the general public; and how can admission be obtained?

Duchess of ATHOLL: As the reply to this question is rather long, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the reply:

There are three libraries under the Board's control—the Board of Education Library, the Library of the Victoria and Albert Museum and the Science Museum Library. The Board of Education Library, a short account of which was included in the Board's Annual Report for 1925–26, contains about 60,000 books and pamphlets. It is open to the teaching profession and the general public from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. daily, except on Saturdays when it closes at 1 p.m., and on public holidays and Sundays. Admission can be obtained on application at the Board's offices. The Library of the Victoria and Albert Museum is a specialised reference library of books on art, and contains about 150,000 volumes and about 250,000 photographs. Under the same administration are the Dyce and Forster Libraries containing about 35,000 volumes, chiefly of interest to students of English literature. These libraries are open to members of the teaching profession and the general public on all weekdays, except Good Friday and Christmas
Day, on Thursdays and Saturdays from 10 a.m. to 8.50 p.m., and on other days from 10 a.m. until 4.50 p.m. Any visitor to the Museum over 18 years of age is freely admitted to the Library to consult ordinary reference books or textbooks on writing his or her name and address at the entrance to the Reading Room. Those not holding other tickets conferring the privilege (such as British Museum Reading Room tickets or membership cards of the National Art-Collections Fund) who desire full use of the Library are requested to make application, accompanied by a personal recommendation from a householder, for a Reader's ticket, which is supplied gratuitously. The Departments of the Museum, including the Indian Section and Bethnal Green, which are in separate buildings, have in each case small libraries of special books for reference in connection with their collections; these are normally accessible to inquirers in the Departments and to visitors who use the Departmental students' rooms. The Science Museum Library is the National Library especially devoted to pure and applied science. It contains about 184,000 volumes and is open to members of the teaching profession and the general public from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays. Admission can be obtained on application to the Director of the Museum or the Keeper of the Library.

ARMY ORDNANCE FACTORIES (EMPLOYES).

Mr. KELLY: 40.
asked the Secretary of State for War the number of civilian employés at Weedon and Didcot in June, 1926, 1927, and 1928?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Duff Cooper): I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following are the figures:

Number of civilians employed on Ordnance Services at Weedon and Didcot on 1st June:



Weedon.
Didcot.


1926
…
…
290
1,073


1927
…
…
275
1,033


1928
…
…
282
1,071

METROPOLITAN POLICE (CHIEF COMMISSIONER).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 41.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in appointing Lord Byng the Chief Commissioner of Police, he issued any special instructions to him to investigate the conditions now prevailing at Scotland Yard and to report what steps might be necessary to reorganise the Department and the rules on which it is at present run?

Sir WILLIAM JOYNSON-HICKS: The answer is in the negative.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Will the right hon. Gentleman say what was meant by "a stem call to duty" if nothing in the nature of special instructions were given?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I think the hon. and gallant Member may be contusing "a stern call to duty" with "a call to stern duty." I made a stern call to Lord Byng to carry out this great duty.

Mr. HAYES: If the need for the appointment of Lord Byng is so urgent, why wait until November for the appointment to take effect?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: The Commissioner does not retire till then.

Mr. HAYES: May we understand that the present Commissioner is not able to deal with the matter which Lord Byng is called upon to deal with?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: Not at all. The Commissioner is unable to deal with the duties of Commissioner after 1st November, because he is retiring on that date, and I have to find a new Commissioner to take over all the duties of Commissioner as from that date.

Mr. LANSBURY: If the facts are as stated, would it not have been possible in the interval to have made inquiries to see whether there was not a man out of work who would have been—[Interruption]—whether there was not a capable man for this position available in the country without going to a gentleman who at least is retired and fairly comfortably well off?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I do not understand the hon. Member's suggestion. He is out of work.

Mr. W. THORNE: Will the present Commissioner have complete control until November?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: The Commissioner will be in such control as he always is, but, of course, as the hon. Member knows, the Commissioner is subject to the Home Secretary, who is subject to the House of Commons. I am responsible, and shall be responsible, for the actions of Sir William Horwood until his retirement?

Mr. HAYES: May I ask if the Commissioner is not already getting on with the job of dealing with this mysterious business which demands such a stern call to duty?

Mr. HARRIS: Why is it necessary to give so many months' notice of the appointment of a successor? It is not usual.

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I really think I might defer answering these questions until Wednesday, when a Debate is taking place. I will make a full statement then.

Mr. LANSBURY: 42.
asked the Home Secretary how many years Sir William Horwood has occupied the position of Chief Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police; what was his salary on appointment; what increases, if any, have been given him during his term of office; is it his intention to recommend a pension to this officer on his retirement; if so, what the amount is to be; and is Sir William Horwood in receipt of a pension from any other Government Department, and has he been in receipt of such a pension, if any, during the period of his service as Chief Commissioner?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: Brigadier-General Sir William Horwood was appointed Commissioner of Police on the 20th April, 1920. The salary was then £2,000 a year, rising to £2,500 after five years, but was increased four months later to £3,000 a year, with retrospective effect from the date of the appointment, on the recommendation of a committee under the chairmanship of the late Lord Oxford and Asquith, which reviewed the emoluments of all the principal posts on the
civil establishments. Cost-of-living bonus was payable in addition until August, 1921. The pension on retirement at 60 will be £1,000 per annum. Sir William Horwood has no pension from any other Government Department.

Mr. LANSBURY: Do I understand that the increase dates from the time of the Chief Commissioner's appointment, so that he will be paid £3,000 a year for the whole period of his appointment; and he receives a nice little bonus for the cost of living? [HON. MEMBERS: "Speech!"] I wish to know the amount of bonus paid to this gentleman. According to the report of the committee, he should have been paid £3,000 a year from the time of his appointment. I want to know what is the amount of the bonus?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: It is the difference between £2,500 and £3,000 a year for four months, that is one-third of £600.

Mr. PALING: How many workers in this country have had their wages raised at the same rate during the same time?

Major-General Sir ALFRED KNOX: Is not this the best possible testimony to Sir William Horwood's efficiency?

SUGAR DUTY.

Sir WILLIAM WAYLAND: 44.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that refiners have refused to give to buyers the full reduction of duty according to polarisation on low-grade sugars in bond at the refinery at the date of the Budget proposals; and will he say if his agreement with the refiners contained any provision for differentiating between high-grade and low-grade sugars?

Mr. SAMUEL: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. If the hon. Member will furnish me with particulars of any case he has in mind I will have inquiries made. As regards the second part, the undertaking given by the sugar refiners contained no provision for differentiating between high-grade and low-grade sugars. I am informed that the price of low-grade sugars was, in fact, reduced by at least the amount of the reduction of duty according to polarisation.

EMPIRE SETTLEMENT BILL.

Sir EVELYN CECIL: 45.
asked the Prime Minister if he can yet state whether His Majesty's Government will grant facilities for the further progress of the Empire Settlement Bill of the hon. Member for Berkshire, Windsor Division (Mr. Somerville), and the Money Resolution relating thereto; and, in the same connection, whether any, or what, decisions have been arrived at on the Report of the Industrial Transference Board?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. The Report of the Industrial Transference Board is now under active consideration by His Majesty's Government. Pending a decision on the issues raised by the Report in connection with migration, my right hon. Friend is not in a position to say whether it will be necessary or possible to grant facilities for the further progress of the Empire Settlement Bill.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: Quite apart from the Report of the Industrial Transference Board, is it not necessary for the Government to provide for the Secretary of State for the Dominions extended powers to deal with the migration question, and do the Government contemplate the provision of such powers?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot add anything to the answer which I have already given.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the Report is likely to be published?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot add anything to the answer which the Prime Minister gave last week.

LEAGUE OF NATIONS (BRITISH DELEGATION).

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: 47.
asked the Prime Minister whether, in arranging for the delegation to the Geneva Assembly this year, he proposes to adopt the practice of all previous Administrations, including his own first Administration, of appointing upon this delegation, in some capacity, a member or members of other political parties?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I have been asked to reply. No, Sir. If the hon. Member will refer to the answer given by the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Anglesey (Sir R. Thomas) on the 26th of June, he will see that it has not been the practice of previous Administrations to appoint as delegates to the Assembly of the League of Nations persons of a party other than that in office.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: My question does not refer to delegates but to one of the positions either of delegate or of assistant delegate, and I think the Prime Minister only referred to the one.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: My answer refers to both, whether they are delegates or whether they are delegates-substitute.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Does the Foreign Secretary say that it has not been the practice to appoint delegates-substitute who were not Members of the Government?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes.

Marquess of HARTINGTON: 48.
asked the Prime Minister whether he can give the names of the British delegates at the coming Assembly of the League of Nations?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I have been asked to reply. The delegates of His Majesty's Government in Great Britain to the forthcoming meeting of the Assembly of the League of Nations will be Lord Cushendun, Sir Cecil Hurst, Sir E. Hilton Young, Dame Edith Lyttelton, Mr. Duff Cooper and myself.

Oral Answers to Questions — INCOME TAX.

WAR INVENTIONS AWARDS.

Captain CROOKSHANK: 49.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state the total sum awarded during the last financial year as gratuities to inventors by the Royal Commission for Awards to Inventors, the Admiralty, War Office, and Air Ministry; whether in all cases Income Tax was deducted at source; and, if so, how much Income Tax accrued to the Exchequer under this head?

Mr. SAMUEL: The answer to the first part of the question is £50,801 10s. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative. The question whether the payments referred to involve liability to Income Tax, and, if so, the question whether the tax falls to be collected by deduction at the source or by means of a direct assessment depend upon the facts of each particular case.

VISITORS.

Captain CROOKSHANK: 50.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, seeing that the liability for British Income Tax upon temporary visitors to this country, whether from the Empire or from foreign countries, depends upon a series of judgments in the House of Lords, he will consider the publication of a short memorandum, which could be widely circulated, indicating the existing state of the law with regard to such visitors, who are clearly unable to have direct access to judicial decisions before they leave home to visit this country?

Mr. SAMUEL: My right hon. Friend has this matter under consideration.

ANGLO-PERSIAN OIL COMPANY.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: 51.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many ex-civil servants, pensioned or otherwise, are at present occupying administrative positions with the Anglo-Persian Oil Company?

Mr. SAMUEL: I have no knowledge of the staff employed by the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. Both of the two Government directors have been in Government service, but neither of them is in receipt of a pension from the State.

Mr. WILLIAMS: Will the Financial Secretary obtain the information sought in the question?

Mr. SAMUEL: No, Sir. It is not within the province of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make such inquiries.

MRS. B. A. PACE.

Mr. PURCELL: (by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider the matter of making
adequate compensation to Mrs. Pace, the Fetter Hill widow, who has been under police surveillance since 10th January, subjected to severe examination by Scotland Yard officers and a protracted coroner's inquiry, arrested on a charge of murder, kept in prison for a lengthy period, and compelled to undergo all the anguish and terrors on the capital charge, and who has now been released, no case having been proved against her; whether he will institute a public inquiry into the position and powers of coroners; and whether, in the public interest—in view of the heavy expense involved in ensuring adequate legal defence—provision cannot be made to guarantee poor persons, particularly those implicated in charges involving life or death, the fullest and best legal and technical defence free from cost?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I have been asked to reply. I only received notice of this question at mid-day to-day. It raises three important matters: First, the question of compensation to Mrs. Pace; secondly, the proposal to hold a public inquiry into the position of coroners; and thirdly, a proposal to provide legal assistance for accused persons. With regard to the two last questions, I am not prepared to give any answer except that these matters will receive due consideration by the proper authorities. With regard to the question of compensation for Mrs. Pace, she has been acquitted by a jury after a very careful and admittedly fair trial. There has been no departure from the ordinary course of the administration of justice. In these circumstances, it is most undesirable, in the interests of justice generally, that any proposal for compensation in this case should be entertained.

Mr. PURCELL: Is there really no sense of decency on the part of the Government? [Interruption.] I repeat, is there no sense of decency on the part of the Crown in connection with a case that has resulted in half this woman's home being destroyed by members of the public who are in a morbid sense out for sight-seeing? Is nothing to be done for a woman who in this case has been thrown into prison without an atom of evidence that she was in any sense responsible
for the crime? Will the Government, or the Crown anyhow, look at the depositions and see whether the ease ought ever to have been proceeded with at all against this woman?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I will certainly look at the depositions, and, if the hon. Member had postponed his question, it would have given me an opportunity to look at the evidence and go into the case.

Mr. PURCELL: I am sorry for that. I posted my question as early as I could on Saturday, and I am sorry that the learned Attorney-General did not receive it earlier.

Mr. MORRIS: May I say that I have put down a question for to-morrow relating to the powers of coroners' juries and the amendment of the law? I do not want to put that question as a Supplementary Question now if I can put it in the ordinary way to-morrow. May I ask, Mr. Speaker, whether I should put my question in the form of a Supplementary Question now, or whether I should put it to-morrow?

Mr. SPEAKER: I should like to see the hon. Member's question before it appears on the Paper.

Mr. MORRIS: I have put it down.

Mr. W. THORNE: Is it not the case that, if the coroner had accepted the verdict of the jury in the first instance, this woman would have been saved from suffering this inhuman torture?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: It is very desirable that reticence should be observed on the subject of a trial in which the accused person has been fully acquitted. The hon. Member will realise that questions and answers might very likely throw doubt, not only in this case but in other cases, upon the nature of the complete acquittal.

Mr. HAYES: When the Attorney-General examines the depositions, will he bear in mind that an ex gratia payment of £500 was made to an ex-officer of His Majesty's Forces, and that obviously a question of justice does arise where a poor woman has been charged with and acquitted of the horrible crime of murder?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: As I have said, it is very undesirable to enter into discussions of a case in which the person in question has been fully acquitted of a charge. If the hon. Gentleman will refer to the case which he mentions, he will find that that was a case in which there had been a conviction.

Captain STREATFEILD: Is the Attorney-General aware that, whatever a coroner's jury may or may not say in a case of this description, there is no getting away from the amount of degradation and suffering that is entailed, even upon persons who are subsequently acquitted, and may I ask him to consider carefully whether cases in which this intense suffering is undergone by people accused erroneously on the capital charge should not be gone into by the Government with a view to giving compensation?

Mr. MORRIS: In view of the fact that the verdict of the coroner's jury remains on the records of the coroner's court, will the Attorney-General take steps to have that verdict quashed; and, further, does he propose to introduce an amendment of the law relating to coroners' juries, limiting the power of a jury to inquiry into the cause of death only, leaving the verdict to the magisterial courts and the assize courts?

Mr. MACPHERSON: Did I understand the Attorney-General to say that the Government are proposing to institute an inquiry into the question of the coroner's inquisition; and, if so, will he bear in mind the fact that in Scotland there are no coroners or coroners' inquisitions, and the progress of justice is always safe and efficient?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I did not say that the Government are contemplating an inquiry into the question of coroners' inquisitions. What I said was that the question which has been submitted at very short notice will receive due consideration from the proper authorities, and everything will be borne in mind. With reference to the question whether I will consider quashing the verdict returned at the coroner's inquisition, I have no power to quash such a verdict. The proper proceedings in accordance with the usual administration
of the law were taken as the result of the verdict returned by the coroner's jury and the committal by the magistrates of the accused person in question upon a particular charge. I respectfully suggest to the House and to hon. Members that it is undesirable to discuss the verdict of complete acquittal which this lady has received.

Mr. SHINWELL: With regard to the third part of the question, relating to legal assistance for prisoners, may I ask if that matter is now being considered by the Government; and, if so, when the Attorney-General will have an opportunity of presenting a statement to the House?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: The Committee presided over by Mr. Justice Finlay has made a Report on the subject of assistance for accused persons who are not able to afford the costs of their own defence, and the Report of the Committee is under consideration.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Are not costs sometimes allowed in particular circumstances to an accused person who has been acquitted, and, in view of the very protracted nature of this case, could not some such arrangement be made, quite apart from the question of compensation?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: There are certain cases in which costs may be allowed. I have had no opportunity of considering the suggestion that costs might be allowed in this case, and I am not able to say whether it is a case in which the Court might make such an order.

Mr. MORRIS: Quite apart from the facts of this particular case, there are two verdicts on the record, namely, that of the coroner's jury finding the person concerned guilty of murder, and the verdict reversing that at the Assize Court. That reveals the illogical state of the law—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech!."] Is it not desirable, therefore, to amend the law so as to limit the findings of a coroner's jury to the cause of death alone?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Whether that is desirable or not, it is not, if I may respectfully say so, a proper subject
of question and answer without due opportunity for considering these important matters.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Will the Attorney-General consider the matter?

Mr. SPEAKER: The notice has been so short that any further questions should be put on the Paper.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Motion made, and Question put,
That the Proceedings on Government Business be exempted, at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—[Sir William Joynson-Hicks.]

The House divided: Ayes, 196; Noes, 91.

Division No. 258.]
AYES.
[3.51 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Albery, Irving James
Gates, Percy
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'd.)


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Nuttall, Ellis


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Oakley, T.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Goff, Sir Park
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Grace, John
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Ashley. Lt.-Cot. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Penny, Frederick George


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Pownall, Sir Assheton


Bennett, A. J.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Price, Major C. W. M.


Berry, Sir George
Hacking, Douglas H.
Ramsden, E.


Betterton, Henry B.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Remer, J. R.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Hamilton, Sir George
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Ropner, Major L.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.
Hartington, Marquess of
Russell, Alexander West (Tynsmouth)


Brass, Captain W.
Haslam, Henry C.
Salmon, Major I.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Briggs, J. Harold
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Briscoe, Richard George
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Sandon, Lord


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Brown, Brig,-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)


Buchan, John
Holt, Captain H. P.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Bullock, Captain M.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Skelton, A. N.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Somerville. A. A. (Windsor)


Campbell, E. T.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hurd, Percy A.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hurst, Gerald B.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Tasker, R. Inigo.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Templeton, W. P.


Christie, J. A.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Knox, Sir Alfred
Tinne, J. A.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Lamb, J. Q.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Cooper, A. Duff
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Vaughan-Morgan. Col. K. P.


Cope, Major Sir William
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Couper, J. B.
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Long, Major Eric
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Looker, Herbert William
Warrender, Sir Victor


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsay, Gainsbro)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Wayland, Sir William A.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Wells, S. R.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Lumley, L. R.
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple.


Davison, sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
McLean, Major A.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Dawson, Sir Philip
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Drewe, C.
Macquisten, F. A.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Elliot. Major Walter E.
Malone, Major P. B.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M)
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Meller, R. J
Withers, John James


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Meyer, Sir Frank
Wolmer, Viscount


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Womersley, W. J.


Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Fielden, E. B.
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Forrest, W.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Foster, Sir Henry S.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)



Fraser, Captain Ian
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Frece, Sir Walter de
Nelson, Sir Frank
Major Sir George Hennessy and Captain Margesson.


NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hardie, George D.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Ammon, Charles George
Hayes, John Henry
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Attlee, Clement Richard
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hirst, G. H.
Shinwell, E.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Barnes, A.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Barr, J.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Batey, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Snell, Harry


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Jones, W. N. (Carmarthen)
Strauss, E. A.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kelly, W. T.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Charleton, H. C.
Kennedy, T.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Cluse, W. S.
Lansbury, George
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Cove, W. G.
Lawrence, Susan
Thurtle, Ernest


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lee, F.
Tomlinson, R. P.


Dalton, Hugh
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Townend, A. E.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Mackinder, W.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Dennison, R.
MacLaren, Andrew
Viant, S. P.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Fenby, T. D.
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Wellock, Wilfred


George, Rt. Hon. David Lloyd
Montague, Frederick
Westwood, J.


Gosling, Harry
Morris, R. H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Naylor, T. E.
Windsor, Walter


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
Wright, W.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Ponsonby, Arthur



Groves, T.
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Grundy, T. W.
Purcell, A. A.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Whiteley.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Salter, Dr. Alfred

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).

STANDING COMMITTEE A.

Mr. William Nicholson reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee A: Mr. Drewe, Mr. Oakley, and Sir Cooper Rawson; and had appointed in substitution: Sir Ernest Craig, Lord Fermoy, and Mr. Geoffrey Peto.

Report to lie upon the Table.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to,—

London County Council (General Powers) Bill, with Amendments

That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to alter the boundary of the Borough of Morecambe so as to include the Urban District of Heysham; to empower the corporation to construct sea walls, promenades and other works; to acquire portions of Morecambe Harbour; and for other purposes." [Morecambe Corporation Bill [Lords.]

Morecambe Corporation Bill [Lords],

Read the First time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

Orders of the Day — RATING AND VALUATION (APPORTIONMENT) BILL.

4TH ALLOTTED DAY.

Further considered in Committee. [Progress, 5th July.]

[Mr. DENNIS HERBERT in the Chair.]

CLAUSE 9.—(Application to Scotland.)

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move, in page 9, line 6, to leave out Sub-section (1).
I imagine that it will be for the convenience of the Committee that we should not take up time in discussing this Amendment in view of the fact that we had a rather prolonged discussion on what amounted to the same subject on Thursday. We should therefore rather conserve our time for the other material points that are to come on later. I formally move the Amendment, so that, if others desire to speak upon it, I shall not stand in their way.

Sir ROBERT HAMILTON: There is a question I should like to put with regard to the definition. The definition of agricultural hereditaments has gone out so far as it applies to Scotland, and, in dealing with Scotland, we have to go back to the 1854 Act for a definition of land and hereditaments. The only definition in that Act is where it says:
The expression 'Lands and Heritages' shall extend to and include all lands, houses, shootings and deer forests,
and so on. If the definition of agricultural land has gone out, I would like to know what is the definition of agricultural land that is intended in Sub-section (4) of this Clause?

The UNDERSECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Major Elliot): The definition of agricultural lands and heritages is to be found in Sub-section (10).

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out, stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 202; Noes, 77.

Division No. 259.]
AYES.
[4.3 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Cooper, A. Duff
Hamilton, Sir George


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman
Cope, Major Sir William
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Couper, J. B.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Harrison, G. J. C.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hartington, Marquess of


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Haslam, Henry C.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F, (Somerset, Yeovil)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Bennett, A. J.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Berry, Sir George
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Betterton, Henry B.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Drewe, C.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Bird, E. A. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Holt, Capt. H. P.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Brass, Captain W.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie


Briggs, J. Harold
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.


Briscoe, Richard George
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Hurd, Percy A.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fielden, E. B.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I
Forrest, W.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Fraser, Captain Ian
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Buchan, John
Frees, Sir Walter de
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Buckingham, Sir H.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William


Bullock, Captain M.
Ganzoni Sir John
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Burman, J. B.
Gates, Percy
Kindersley, Major G. M.


Campbell, E. T.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
King, Commodore Henry Douglas


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Goff, Sir Park
Knox, Sir Alfred


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Grace, John
Lamb, J. O.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Grant, Sir J. A.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birn., W.)
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E.)
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Long, Major Eric


Christie, J. A.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Looker, Herbert William


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Perring, Sir William George
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Lumley, L. R.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Tasker, R. Inigo


Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Templeton, W. P.


MacLaren, Andrew
Price, Major C. W. M.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell


McLean, Major A.
Ramsden, E.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Tinne, J. A.


Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Ropner, Major L.
Tomlinson, R. P.


Macquisten, F. A.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Salmon, Major I.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Malone, Major P. B.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Margesson, Captain D.
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Warrender, Sir Victor


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Meller, R. J.
Sandon, Lord
Wells, S. R.


Meyer, Sir Frank
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew. W.)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Skelton, A. N.
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kine'dine, C.)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Nelson, Sir Frank
Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Withers, John James


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Spender-Clay, Coloner H.
Womersley, W. J.


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptarsf'ld.)
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Oakley, T.
Storry, Deans, R.



O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Strauss, E. A.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Mr. Penny and Captain Wallace.


NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Ammon, Charles George
Hardle, George D.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hayes, John Henry
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Shinwell, E.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hirst, G. H.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Barnes, A.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Barr, J.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Batey, Joseph
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Snell, Harry


Broad, F. A.
Kelly, W. T.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kennedy, T.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Charleton, H. C.
Lansbury, George
Thurtle, Ernest


Cluse, W. S.
Lawrence, Susan
Townend, A. E.


Cove, W. G.
Lee. F.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Dalton, Hugh
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Viant, S. P.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Mackinder, W.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Dennison, R.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Malone, C. L' Estrange (N'thampton)
Wellock, Wilfred


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Montague, Frederick
Westwood, J.


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Morris, R. H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Gosling, Harry
Naylor, T. E.
Windsor, Walter


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wright, W.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.



Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Purcell, A. A.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Groves, T.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Mr. Whiteley and Mr. Paling.


Grundy, T. W.
Salter, Dr. Alfred

Sir ALEXANDER SPROT: I beg to move, in page 9, line 36, at the end, to insert the words:
and, in the case of agricultural land and heritages, the value of the house and cottages situated thereon shall be shown separated from the value of the agricultural land.
Sub-section (4) is to the effect that certain marks shall be put in the valuation roll to show what are agricultural lands, what are industrial lands and what are freight-transport lands, and I want to take the opportunity of this revision of the marking of the valuation roll for Scotland to put in the value of the farmhouse which, up to now in Scotland, has not been shown separately
from the value of the farm. I consider that it is desirable to do this at this stage, for reasons which I will give. There is no harm in knowing the value of a farmhouse separately from the farm itself and the agricultural buildings or steadings thereon. It is, of course, the English practice to show the value of farmhouses separately, and I do not see any harm in knowing it. The assessors, who are public servants, would do this without expense, and the valuation could be arrived at by the assessor putting a value on the farmhouse, subject, of course, to appeal to the assessment committee of the county council or even to the High Court in the event of dispute.
Unlike those hon. Gentlemen opposite, who voted on Thursday last against Scotland having the advantage of this general scheme of de-rating which has been proposed for the whole of the country, my hon. Friends here consider that the advantages will be very great indeed, and the line we take is that we want Scotland to have the full advantage of what is going to be done. I am not going into the whole question of the derating proposals towards which this Bill is only a step, but I would like to be allowed to quote what the Chancellor of the Exchequer said in bringing in his Budget:
Farm lands and buildings will, therefore, from and in October, 1929, that is, after the rate payment of April, 1929, be at once completely and permanently relieved of all rates. The farmer will continue, of course, to pay rates on his residence in the ordinary way; but, so far as agricultural production is concerned, he will be entirely free. There will be no chance of rates being raised upon him for any cause or in any district. The whole business of assessment and re-assessment, as far as he is concerned, comes to a final end. Out's out. To him, after the middle of next year, the rates are dead, and, as the poet said, "Stone dead hath no fellow."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 24th April, 1928; col. 865, Vol. 216.]
That is what the Chancellor of the Exchequer said. I would like to quote, with regard to that, from a leaflet or pamphlet issued by the headquarters of the Conservative party dealing with these rating reform proposals, in which it says:
Agricultural land and buildings which already enjoy relief to the extent of three-fourths of the rates should be completely and permanently relieved of all rates, the farmer continuing to pay rates on his residence in the ordinary way.
When my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland came to explain the definite provision that would have to be made in this matter to adapt it to the Scottish system, he told us quite clearly that his plan, among other things, was not to value the farmhouse on the farm separately, according to the English fashion, but to make an allowance of, I think he said, one-sixth of the value of the farm and to take that as being in all cases the value of the house. It is, I think, assuming a great deal to say that one-sixth of the value of a farm represents the value of the house in which the farmer lives. In may be so in certain cases, but it is certainly not so in a very large number of other cases.
Even supposing you do adopt that as a general rule, you will not be able to say, when this new de-rating system is brought into existence, that you have derated agricultural land in Scotland. You will still be charged with rates on one-sixth of its value. Therefore, this leaflet or propaganda pamphlet by our party should not be circulated in Scotland, because it will not, strictly speaking, be true. It will not be de-rating the land. That is a clear exposition of what my proposal amounts to. Unlike hon. Gentlemen opposite, I entirely approve of the idea of de-rating agricultural land. I consider that it will bring a great advantage to Scotland, but, as I said before, the Scottish farmer will be in an unfavourable position as compared with the English farmer if my right hon. Friend's proposals are carried out.

Mr. HARDIE: You voted for them.

Sir A. SPROT: I support the general proposals, but I wish to make this Amendment in order that Scotland may have fairer play when these general proposals are carried out. Surely, that is quite clear. Take the owner-occupiers, who every day are getting more numerous in our country. May I say that in the parish in which I live I am the only landowner who is not an owner-occupier. All the others in my parish are farmers who own and farm their own farms. That is getting more and more the case all over the country. On our side of the border, he will still be rated on his land whereas if he were in England he would be merely rated on the assessed value of his house. There is also the case of the parcels of land, grass plots, small farms and so on on which there is no house at all, and allotments. I should like to ask, and perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will inform us when he replies, whether it is his intention or not to put the burden of one-sixth of the value of an imaginary house upon those subjects or not. That is a point upon which I should like to be informed.
I do not want to go into the whole question of the general scheme more than is necessary, but I should like him to inform the Committee as to whether he still sticks to the fraction of one-sixth which is proposed as being the assumed value of a farmer's house upon his farm. It is quite certain that that
will lead to very great inequalities. There will be a great deal of grumbling in many cases. Many farmers will think that having to pay rates upon one-sixth of the value of their whole farm, instead of the actual value of their house, will lead them into being called upon to pay higher rates than they consider that they ought to be called upon to pay. There will also be the jealousy of the other people—the butcher, the baker and the candlestick-maker, who all pay rates upon the value of the house in which they are living. They may think that some farmer or other is paying too little in the way of rates, because of this convention which my right hon. Friend recommends. In fact, I submit that the only fair way is to make it the same all over the United Kingdom. The value of the house in which a man lives is taken to be a rough measure of his ability to pay rates. It is not, of course, in every case a just and an accurate measure of his ability. Still we have been accustomed to take it as the measure of his ability to pay rates, and it is a thing from which you cannot get away. There will be no arguing about it if you simply adopt all over the country the system of calling for rates to be paid on the value of a house in which a man lives, and in no other way. I believe that one reason why my right hon. Friend, from whom I am very sorry to differ on any small point, has adopted his suggestion is that in the cases of crofters and smallholders the English system will operate unfairly. I am not sure that that is going to be the case. I have had the actual figures of many existing eases put before me, and it has not always worked out so.
Crofters have always been specially treated by our laws, and there is no reason why they should not be specially treated in this particular way. They are marked off as a class by themselves, and some special proviso could be made to meet their case. I am dealing with the Lowland farms with which I am accustomed. I know comparatively little about the Highlands. This is my proposal. It has been greatly discussed in Scotland. Associations of various sorts have had it under very keen discussion. Some of them think my way, some of them think the other way, and one particular
association has recently changed its view. But I think the people who took part in those discussions probably judged this matter from their own particular case, or from the cases of their friends around them. I think that Scotland is going to lose by not being exactly on the same terms as England in this matter. It is not right to say that I am advocating that the English system should be applied to Scotland. There is nothing particularly English about it. I do not know when this particular difference of not showing the value of the house separately from the farm arose. I do not know what the history of it is or how it came about. But there is nothing particularly Scottish about it. It might just as well have happened that England might have adopted the other system, and we might have adopted what is now their system. I am suggesting that the same rule should hold good in both cases. That is all that I say.
I do think that we in Scotland are going to lose by this if my right hon. Friend's suggestion is adopted. There will be a change in the rents of farms. A change in rents of farms may mean that the rent may go up or it may go down, and that will alter the incidence of rating in Scotland in rather an awkward way. There will be a change, perhaps, in the Government grant which is going to be made from the general Treasury to the whole country to meet the needs of Scotland. We have always lost in that way when these sorts of changes have been made, because when you deal with agricultural land and such things the tendency is for legislation in the first instance to be with reference to the English system, and to the conditions which prevail in England. Then perhaps a year or two afterwards you have to pass another Act of Parliament in order to meet the case of Scotland. It has happened in the past, and, I fear, will happen in the future, if my suggestion is not adopted. When changes take place, Scotland will be adversely affected and will not get her fair share of what is going, and Scottish agriculture will be prejudically affected as compared with England. Does the right hon. Gentleman still adhere to the fraction of one-sixth? It is rather important that we should know that, because
we have been going into these figures and we are of opinion that one-sixth is too small. [HON. MEMBERS: "Too large!"] Well, it is not the right proportion. I will put it that way. It is rather difficult working out vulgar fractions. A fraction of one-eighth has been mentioned. That would be rather better, but it would be better still, if the right hon. Gentleman must have his way and if he will not adopt my way, that the fraction should be one-tenth or one-twelfth. That would be fairer for Scottish agriculture.

Sir HARRY HOPE: I rise to support the Amendment. The Government have told the House and the country that it is their intention to de-rate agricultural land and only to make an assessment upon the farmhouse and the farm cottages. They are not carrying out that promise unless they accept this Amendment. What my hon. and gallant Friend is arguing for, and what I am arguing for, is that the farmer should be assessed as every other man in the country is assessed, whether he be a tradesman or a private individual, on the value of his house. The proposal which is made by the Secretary of State for Scotland is a totally new method of arriving at the assessment. He makes the novel proposal that the value of the house should be taken at one-sixth of the gross rental of the farm. The approved and existing system of valuation and assessment ought to be adopted, and under that system the farmer would be put in the same position as everybody else in regard to the assessment on his house. If the Amendment is not to be accepted, let us see what an extremely awkward position we shall be in. My right hon. Friend says: "We will not separate the farmhouse and the farm cottages, but we will take an arbitrary valuation of one-sixth." In that way, we get into an awkward position. On many farms you have more farm cottages than on others. In other parts you have sheep farms, which comprise a very large area of our country, with perhaps only one cottage for the shepherd, or two cottages, while in the arable districts you will have several cottages for the workmen. In some counties there is the system known as the bothie system, which is a bad system.
By making a uniform valuation that all the houses, whether they exist or not, shall be considered to be one-sixth of the gross rent of the farm, you are going to create a situation in which many anomalies will be created and injustice will be rampant. All that we ask is that the approved and recognised system of assessment should be adopted in these cases, and the onus rests on the right hon. Gentleman to prove that in making the novel departure which he proposes he has any solid foundation for so doing. In the case of England, the farmhouse and the cottages for the workmen are separated from the land for assessment purposes, but my right hon. Friend is not following that precedent. The various representative bodies in Scotland have recognised that in making this novel departure the farmers and the owners in Scotland may have an unfair aspersion cast upon them. It may be said of them: "You are receiving special and favoured conditions. You are not assessed on the value of your houses, as the butcher or the baker is assessed. You get special preferential treatment." We do not want that charge to be leviable against the owners and farmers in Scotland. We ask for no favoured position for them. All that we ask is that the farmhouse and the cottages for the workmen should be valued as is done in England, and as has always been done in England.
My right hon. Friend may say that it is difficult to value separately the farmhouse and the cottages, but I would point out that prior to 1924, when the Inhabited House Duty was removed by the Socialist Government, the value of the farmhouse was in the valuation roll. We have only to look back at the valuation roll prior to 1924 to see the value of the farmhouse. As regards the cottages, we all know that owners and farmers always had to put in the value of the cottages. Although that was done, for what were called franchise purposes, the fact remains that it was done, and without any trouble the assessors in the county could revise the figures. Therefore there is no difficult machinery involved in the Amendment. I cannot understand any hon. Members opposite objecting to the generally accepted and approved system of assessment which we suggest should be adopted. It is a
plain, honest, straightforward system. We only ask that the farmhouse and the farm cottages should be assessed, where they exist, on their value. Instead of this regular method, which we advocate, the Secretary of State for Scotland proposes that one-sixth of the gross rental of the farm should be put opposite the value of these particular subjects. I am certain that if he follows that course there will be a great outcry in Scotland. It will be said that Scotland is not getting the same treatment that is being given to England. If my right hon. Friend adheres to that fraction of one-sixth, although it may seem an unimportant matter, there will be gross injustice in a great number of cases. In the County of Forfarshire, which I represent, we have farms where the rental is, say, £900. That would mean that the farmhouse and the cottages would be assessed at £150. The thing is absurd. We ask that they should be assessed on what they are worth. If they are worth more, let them be assessed at more, and if they are worth less let them be assessed at their value.

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): I appreciate the differences of opinion which have been expressed upon this subject and I want the Committee to realise at the outset that in taking the steps which I have proposed to deal with this problem upon a percentage and not upon the direct valuation of the farmhouse and the farm cottages, it is not I who am making a departure, but it is those who ask me to take other steps who are making a departure. What is the history of valuation in Scotland as compared with England? In England they have always separated the buildings from the land. That has been a long-established custom. It is equally true that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in speaking upon the proposal to assist productive industry, explained to the House, in plain and unmistakable terms, that, so far as England was concerned, they proposed to arrive at the measure of relief which they were proposing to give to the agricultural industry, as a productive industry, by following the well and long-established English precedent of totally de-rating
the land and the farm buildings and of leaving the farmhouse and the farm cottages as they were at present, namely, rated upon their particular value. The right hon. Gentleman, in equally unmistakable terms, added that in view of the fact that there was great diversity of method and procedure in Scotland it would be my duty to explain to the House the method under which we proposed to arrive at the total relief of the productive industry of agriculture in Scotland. It may well be that in presenting the case to the House I may have failed to make myself entirely clear, and I want to-day, if I can, to bring back to the House this fundamental point, that we are concerned in Scotland in giving, as nearly as we may, a similar measure of relief, no more and no less, to the agricultural industry in Scotland to that which is being achieved in England.
Working in that manner, I suggest to the Committee and to Scotland that as in the past it has been the established custom of our country to value not the farmhouse and the cottage separately but to take the farm as a unit and to value it as a unit and to enter it in the Valuation Roll as a unit, by adopting a percentage upon the gross rental we are maintaining the long-established, well-known custom of dealing with this problem in Scotland. All that concerns the Committee in the present Bill is not whether the percentage I have suggested—one-sixth—is the proper and just percentage but whether provision shall be made for differentiating between these different subjects. That is, in fact, the only question which the Committee has to decide. It has been already pointed out by the hon. and gallant Member for North Lanark (Sir A. Sprot) that if the houses were separately assessed it would raise a fundamental difficulty with regard to the crofting areas and the small landholders in the country, and he suggested that it should be dealt with in some other way. I think it would be very desirable if we can, with a fair measure of justice to all concerned, arrive at a broad general method rather than introduce a number of exemptions and alterations. It may be, taking the system I suggest, that certain anomalies will be found. I do not know any system of valuation which will not have anomalies at both
ends of the scale, but I am concerned not with a small number of anomalies but with getting for the agricultural industry of Scotland, on a broad and understandable basis, an equal measure of relief to that which agriculture gets in England.
I pass from the crofting districts in Scotland to the small farms. We find in Scotland a larger proportion of small agricultural holdings than in England, and that of itself should make hon. Members consider carefully the effect of this Measure on a moderate sized holding of from 100 to 150 acres. In the past our system has been to ask the holder of agricultural subjects to pay rates on one-quarter of his holding value, and I am suggesting that in future he shall pay one-sixth. I am, therefore, with one stroke of the pen, giving a reduction of rates to every individual tenant in the country. On the other hand, when I look at the larger farms I ask myself whether this is going to be reasonably fair towards these farms or not. One may point to the large farms and say, "Here is a large farm where a man is paying a rent of £900," as in the case referred to by the hon. Member for Forfar (Sir H. Hope), and contend that it is unreasonable to say that that fraction truly represents the value of the farmhouse and cottages on that holding. The hon. and gallant Member for North Lanark and the hon. Member for Forfar put far too much stress on the question of the value of the houses and cottages and far too little on what I will call a fair and reasonable contribution of this productive industry towards the support of local rates.
While relieving productive industry, either agricultural or in the manufacturing centres, it is part of the Government's policy to say that both shall pay a measure of contribution towards local services. It is on that basis that I am proceeding with the proposal of a percentage. I have watched with interest the discussion which has ensued upon these proposals in Scotland. It is a very complicated problem, and one upon which those who have studied it may rightly and properly take different views. But I am fortified in the position I have taken up by the fact that the more I have discussed it with representative farmers throughout the country the more certain am I that a percentage, whether it is the
present percentage or another, is the proper way of achieving the end by which agriculture in Scotland, with the fewest anomalies and inconsistencies, shall have the same benefit as agriculture in England. Take the Chamber of Agriculture in Scotland. It is true that the executive of that body met and discussed this problem immediately after it was mooted. It is true that they came to a certain conclusion, which they were prepared to recommend to the larger gathering of the Chamber of Agriculture. That conclusion was in favour of a direct valuation of the subjects, but when they came to the larger arena and discussed it with the rank and file of the agricultural community the result was that the proposal of direct valuation was not even pressed to a division; those who had so hotly protested in favour of it did not have the courage to carry it to a division in the Chamber.
There is this further point. I have met deputations from other agricultural bodies, and they have said quite frankly that they can point to this and that anomaly. I have replied, "How do you propose to deal with the case of the small farmers, the case of the crofters, the case of the smallholders, and their answer was, "That is your affair." It is my affair, and I propose to make it my affair. I think the hon. and gallant Member, after further consultation with agricultural interests in Scotland, will come to the conclusion that there are considerable advantages to be gained by the method proposed. It is quite clear, from the Treasury point of view, that we must have some idea of where we are, and it is only by taking a broad principle like this that it can be achieved. Another important point in considering this question is that landlord and tenant in Scotland are perhaps more closely interlocked in the management of agricultural estates and farms than in England. Landlords have always borne a portion of the burden of the rates, and in recent years they have borne that burden to an increasing extents—three-quarters as against the quarter of the tenant—and when I look around the agricultural position in my own country, as it is my duty and pleasure to do, I find that there is a great deal which ought to be done and should be done towards the improvement of the cottages of the workers on the land.
Anything which will help to stimulate and increase this will be to the advantage of the workers in the industry. If you are going to take individual houses and cottages, and every time that a landlord makes improvements on these subjects he is to be, liable to an increase of assessment and rating, you are doing what in my judgment is contrary to the interests of the great mass of those who are employed on the land. I hope the Amendment will be withdrawn and that we shall leave the position in Scotland to be worked on the same basis as in the past. With regard to the problem of the fraction, I invite all those who are interested to examine the matter carefully and produce if they will any figures or arguments which may bring pressure to bear upon myself and my office or upon His Majesty's Government as a whole. I am advised that we have by this fraction arrived at a figure which will be reasonably fair compared with the general relief given to the agricultural industry in England. If it can be shown that it is not so I am ready to listen to those arguments.

Sir A. SPROT: I put a question to the Secretary of State, perhaps he will allow me to remind him of it. Is he going to apply this system of a fraction to land on which there are no houses?

Sir J. GILMOUR: Yes, certainly. The fundamental point is that there is a contribution by each agricultural holder towards local services which he gets whether he has a house on that subject or not.

5.0 p.m.

Mr. MACPHERSON: I hesitate to intervene in the pleasant family difference which exists between the Secretary of State and hon. Members opposite. On this occasion I agree wholeheartedly with the Secretary of State. He has taken a wise and statesmanlike view of the situation, and hon. Members on these benches felt that the end of his speech was full of hope. He suggested that if we accept the percentage basis, which we do, and bombard him with facts and figures and statistics, that he is not altogether adamant. We can approach him with some degree of hope. I am quite convinced that direct valuation is the wrong basis, and the Secretary of State, by his exposition of
the broad general principle, has explained why in all the circumstances of the case the percentage basis is right. When I saw the Amendment on the Order Paper I frankly thought there was a great deal in it. I am certain, however, that it would create a flood of anomalies. I gathered, however, that there was hope in the speech of the Secretary of State that the real difficulty and anomalies might be overcome. I have a great deal of sympathy with the large farmer who fears that he is going to bear the biggest share of the agricultural taxation of the country. The case which the hon. Member for Forfar (Sir H. Hope) gave is a case in point. A great many of these cases will undoubtedly arise and they will have to be met, and I hope that the Secretary of State will meet them sympathetically. I know of a case where the rent of the farm is £1,200. At the present time the house is included in the valuation, and it is valued, I understand, at £50. If you are to rate farms on the percentage basis you will rate that house at £200. The situation which arises is a very difficult one, which I trust the Secretary of State will consider sympathetically. That is the case of the large farm.
Take the case of the smallholder and the small farmer. I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman has taken such a determined attitude on behalf of the percentage basis so far as the smallholder and the small farmer are concerned. The Amendment seeks to embody the English system into a Scottish Bill. There is no doubt about that. In Scotland we have always regarded the unit as a composite unit for rating purposes; we have never valued the house part from the land or the land apart from the house. If the Secretary of State were to introduce the English system, there would be a breach of faith with the smallholder, for under the various Acts the smallholder in Scotland is now exempt from the rating of his house and improvements. That system has been in existence, so far as the smallholders are concerned, for nearly half a century. Would the Secretary of State be right or just in introducing a new system? I think it was Mr. Norman Reid who pointed out in a report that it would be a distinct breach of faith with these smallholders. I am glad, therefore,
that the Secretary of State has taken the bold course and the Scottish course and the natural course, and has treated the farm as a distinct and composite unit, not the house apart from the land or vice versa.
I am sure that the Committee listened with great interest to the Secretary of State when he said that this is merely the beginning of the fight. I am paraphrasing his words. That is the point which I made in the Debate the other day. The people of Scotland have not yet realised the difficulties and the dangers that are in store for them. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State may laugh, but to-day I have received no fewer than seven letters denouncing the prospective proposals of the Government, of which this is merely a fleabite. The Government expect at the end of this year to abolish all rating authorities—parish councils, school management committees—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order, order!"] I am merely showing how important this is. If I am out of order no doubt the Deputy-Chairman will tell me so. In any case I was about to end my remarks. I am speaking for the party to which I belong. While we have a great deal of sypmpathy with the case put by the two hon. Members who moved and seconded the Amendment, so far as the large farmers are concerned, we are convinced that the Secretary of State has taken the wise and right course in maintaining the traditional Scottish system of rating and of valuing a unit as a composite unit. So long as the right hon. Gentleman proceeds on those lines and extends the percentage from one-sixth to one-tenth or one-twelfth, which I think he feels bound to do, we are entitled to support him in the present proposals of the Bill.

Mr. JOHNSTON: For once in a blue moon we find ourselves, on this side of the Committee, in complete agreement with the Secretary of State.

Mr. MacLAREN: Not at all.

Mr. JOHNSTON: With the exception of my hon. Friend, who takes a very keen interest in taxation matters. The reason why most of us on this side support the right hon. Gentleman's attitude in this matter is precisely the reason that, I should have thought, would have satisfied my hon. Friend. Once a percentage
is fixed, once a basis is fixed, there is every encouragement for the provision of new workers' cottages on an estate, because every additional cottage then built will not be subject to rates at all, and consequently every additional building of a workman's house, not subject to local rates, on an estate, will assist greatly in the improvement of working-class houses in the rural areas of Scotland. For that reason and for that reason alone, we would be prepared to agree with the right hon. Gentleman against the view taken by the two hon. Members who spoke in support of the Amendment. But there is no sense in disguising the fact that while that is so, you will under this proposal have cottages on agricultural land that will be bearing no share whatever of the local rates—new buildings after the one-sixth is eaten up. Whatever new buildings are built will be built rate free. I think that is so. I am hoping it is so. New cottages which are built will be built local tax free.
You will therefore have cottages on rural estates in Scotland which will be bearing no local taxation, while the tenants of industrial properties in the boroughs and villages will continue to pay and have no share in the relief. The right hon. Gentleman is on the slippery slope. I am glad to see him there. I hope that he will follow his decision to its logical conclusion. If he does so, he will de-rate all tenants' houses, whether they are on agricultural subjects or otherwise, with a view to the real and permanent encouragement of house building in this country. I take it that there is no greater barrier to the building of working-class houses for the poorest of the poor than the fact that every new house erected is immediately subject to the handicap of local rates. I saw an ingenious proposal made by a late Member of this House——

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. Gentleman would not be in order in dealing with the question of de-rating industrial hereditaments.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I wished to show that the attitude of the right hon. Gentleman, in so far as agricultural subjects are concerned, had put him on a slippery slope and that there was no step he could take——

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I allowed the hon. Member to get to the top of the slippery slope, but I cannot allow him to get to the bottom of it.

Mr. JOHNSTON: While we approve of the step that the right hon. Gentleman is taking this afternoon, in so far as we believe that it will logically end in the de-rating of future rural cottages, we see no reason why he should stop there; we cannot see his justification for taking up an attitude that will mean ultimately the de-rating of rural cottages and the 100 per cent. taxation of urban cottages and dwellings of the poorer tenants. We trust that in further stages of this Bill, and in succeeding Bills which must necessarily follow, the right hon. Gentleman will have regard to the very serious anomalies that his present attitude will bring about unless he carries the matter further and adopts for the tenants in urban areas the policy which he is willing to adopt for the tenants in rural areas.

Mr. SKELTON: As far as this Debate has gone, I think it is a really good augury that for once Members of all three parties are in agreement on a matter which is of real value to Scottish agriculture. In my not very long experience of the House I do not recollect a similar situation having arisen. It may be one of the indications that are not altogether absent otherwise, that the time may not be far distant when something like an agreed policy with regard to agriculture—a national policy—may be forthcoming. I shall not say more on that very wide topic. I rose merely to urge—though urging is not necessary—my right hon. Friend to continue in the method that he has adopted, namely, the fractional method of valuing the Scottish farmhouse and cottages, rather than the door-to-door and house-to-house valuation recommended in the Amendment. The arguments in favour of the method which my right hon. Friend has adopted have been so cogently put by the two last speakers that I shall not repeat them. One additional remark must be made. It has already been pointed out how valuable it will be for the increase and improvement of rural housing in Scotland that each separate dwelling on a farm should not be separately valued.
A further point in that connection is this: There is a tendency, perhaps more marked in England than in Scotland, towards what is called the ranch system of farming. There is a school of agricultural thought which believes that ranching, that is to say, the creation of wide expanses of farm land, with a very small amount of labour and few houses, is, for large parts of England, and, possibly, for some parts of Scotland, the proper future of agriculture. I have never believed that theory, and I am glad that the method which my right hon. Friend has adopted in this case will—as far as it can be done in this connection—put a spoke in that wheel. Had the alternative method of house-to-house valuation been adopted, the tendency would have been to check the building of new houses or the improvement of existing houses. In certain cases where more than one farm is held by one owner it actually would have brought about a tendency towards the non-maintenance, and even the demolition, of existing cottages and houses. The demolition of existing houses is, of course, part and parcel of the ranch system, and I am sure that the change proposed in the Amendment, from the valuation of the agricultural subject as a whole, to the separation of the houses from the land, would tend, as far as rating can do so, to develop the ranch system in Scotland. That is another reason why, in my judgment, the Secretary of State has made a right decision.
The question arises, however, of whether my right hon. Friend has adopted the right fraction or not. I cannot myself think that he has adopted the right fraction. If you try to strike an average of the farms and of farming in Scotland on the overhead method—the only method which you can employ—I cannot believe that you will find the farmhouses and cottages represented by one-sixth of the total. I am sure it must be nearer one-eighth, and I am not at all certain that an even smaller fraction could not be worked out as correct. This is the only matter, I think, upon which Scottish agricultural opinion will find itself at variance with my right hon. Friend, when this question has been fully threshed out, because I do not believe that Scottish rural opinion—that is to say the opinion of those who
know about the subject—will be honestly satisfied that one-sixth is the correct figure. I strongly urge my right hon. Friend to reconsider that point. I know that this is not the time for my right hon. Friend to say what figure he has in mind. I am grateful to him, however for having said that the one-sixth is not a fixed adamantine fraction, and I assure him that that unanimous Scottish opinion, to which I alluded at the beginning of my remarks, will be concentrated upon encouraging him, if I may use that expression, to adopt a fraction certainly of one-eighth, if not of one-tenth. Having dealt with that single fact, I wish to add my congratulations to those already expressed on the decision of my right hon. Friend. It was not an easy decision because it is possible, unquestionably, to find certain anomalies, but it is a decision which puts all the tendencies in the right direction, in place of a decision which would have put them all in the wrong direction. That has been made perfectly clear by the arguments which we have heard from both sides of the Committee.

Mr. MacLAREN: I am sorry to intrude the poison of dissension into the very grandmotherly, mutual association sort of Debate which has developed. It may be said that a Member representing an English Division has no right to intervene on this occasion, but one or two points of cardinal importance seem to have been overlooked. The Secretary of State played a very fine trick, if I may say so, in his summing up and he played it so deftly that my colleague the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston) fell straight into the trap. The right hon. Gentleman pointed out that as far as small allotments were concerned, this one-sixth would he a safeguard against the constant encroachments of the rate-collector and that, indeed, it was the idea of keeping back the increase of rates which caused him to hit upon the one-sixth fraction. The hon. Member for Dundee snapped up the suggestion and I wish to put him on his guard. The hon. Member for Dundee went on to suggest that there would come a time when the one-sixth would have been paid, and he assumed that all cottages erected thereafter would not be subject to rates. I noticed that immediately there were
signs of dissent on the Government Front Bench and no wonder. This one-sixth is to be one-sixth of the composite subject of valuation. Any increase in the number of cottages within the subject will increase the total value of the subject. New cottages will only add an increased value to the subject, but all will come under the rate. It will still be one-sixth of the whole, whatever that may be. It is fallacious to suggest that the one-sixth is a stabilised figure and does not allow for expansion with every increase in the capital value of the composite subject.
One of the greatest surprises which the Committee has had to-day has been the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ross and Cromarty (Mr. Macpherson), who said it has been an old-established custom in Scotland to go in for valuation of the composite subject. That is new Liberalism to me. [Interruption.] I know it is tradition but Liberalism in Scotland has been constantly fighting tradition and, as far as I can remember, it has fought in Scotland to smash the system of the valuation of the composite subject. The policy adopted and recommended by a well-remembered Member of this House, the late Mr. Alexander Ure, was not the continuation of the system of the composite subject, but that there should be a separate valuation of the improvements as distinct from the land. It was not said, as my right hon. Friend seems to assume——

Mr. MACPHERSON: It is the law of the land.

Mr. MacLAREN: I know it is the law of the land and I am merely pointing out that, coming from the Liberal Benches, the right hon. Gentleman's speech seems to be a departure from the old progressive and radical point of view, which was that improvements effected on land, whether urban or agricultural, should be distinct in regard to valuation and should be treated separately. That was a cardinal feature of Liberal doctrine many years ago. Running through this discussion there are two principles which seem to have become involved. I am in favour of the Amendment because it carries out a principle which we will have to recognise. I put it to my right hon. Friend the Member for Ross and Cromarty, that if he takes
this suggestion in relation to urban land, he will see at once that it will be in harmony with his own views that the valuations should be made clearly distinct as between the improvements and the land. There should be no more difficulty in applying the principle in agricultural than in urban areas. The Amendment has been well argued and it was interesting to notice that when the question of anomalies arose, the right hon. Gentleman admitted that anomalies would take place. It is no argument to say that although the Amendment may have justice behind it, there are sentimental and other reasons why we must go in for this fractional method even if we are forced into the confession that anomalies will arise from it. It is in order to get at the separation of the land value from the improvement value that I am in favour of the Amendment. It is not enough for the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross (Mr. Skelton) merely to say that he does not regard the one-sixth as a workable fraction. It is his place to prove what fraction is workable and I do not know of any.
The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State had two excuses for his proposal, one of which seemed to compromise the other. He said that one-sixth was better than one-fourth because it would encourage improvements; but almost in the next breath he said that, even in the cases where one-sixth would be too much, one-sixth should be inserted so as to compel agricultural owners to contribute their fair quota to the local rateable value of the area. I ask English Members to note that suggestion. I thought it quite a new feature with regard to Scotland. Even if the one-sixth is too much, the Secretary of State says he has the right to exact it on the ground that these people ought to contribute a certain amount to the local rates burden. That is a novel suggestion and is in marked distinction to anything so far advanced in regard to Scotland. Much that has been said about the discouragement of cottage building in agricultural areas is true. It is true that every improvement effected by housing and agricultural development has been penalised by increases in rates. But you will hot get over that difficulty by this one-sixth proposal. The difficulty goes deeper than
that, and it will remain until there is a radical change, along Scottish lines and on the basis of segregating the improvements from the land.
The only way to encourage improvements is to de-rate improvements entirely. The man who has effected an improvement ought not to be called upon to pay even one-sixth. Abolish rates on improvements entirely. Of course, that is asking too much; but I suggest that, as this Bill now stands, the Amendment although it would not effect much in regard to the policy of the Bill, would have a significant effect upon future developments in Scotland. If this Amendment were incorporated in the Bill, it would be on all-fours with the demand which has gone up from Scotland for years, that a distinction should be made between the annual market value of improvements and the annual market value of the land. Therefore, I support the Amendment for reasons which differ perhaps from those advanced by other hon. Members. It may be that my reasons will be regarded as dangerous or subtle; but I think the reasons which I am advancing are consistent with those advanced by Commission after Commission appointed to consider this matter in relation to Scotland.

Major Sir ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR: Before dealing with the speech of the hon. Member who has just sat down, I wish to call attention to the position as it is left by the speech of the Secretary of State for Scotland. The hon. Member for Northern Lanark (Sir A. Sprot), who introduced this Debate, referred to the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he first produced these proposals in this House. I could not help contrasting the glum, slow, halting, almost lachrymose way in which the hon. Member read out that quotation, with the "first, fine, careless rapture" with which the hon. Member and his colleagues greeted those words when they were spoken by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and the Secretary of State himself, in his speech, provided a striking commentary on the distance which we have travelled since the day when the Chancellor of the Exchequer introduced his proposals. The Secretary of State for Scotland talked of it being no part of the Government's policy in relieving agriculture to deny that
farmers should pay contributions to local services, and on that basis, he said, the Government were proceeding. There was very little about that basis in the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 24th April. He talked in a very different tone. He said:
The whole business of assessment and re-assessment, as far as he is concerned, comes to a final end. Out's out…. 'Stone dead hath no fellow.' "—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 24th April, 1928; col. 865, Vol. 216.]
Now the Secretary of State for Scotland comes and argues eloquently and cogently in favour of a certain measure of assessment, and says that agriculture ought to make its proper contribution to the cost of local burdens. We have travelled a very long way since the Chancellor introduced his Budget. There was nothing, moreover, in the Chancellor of the Exchequer's speech to indicate that, so far as farm servants' houses were concerned, they were to be an object of rating. After all, the Budget, the Chancellor told us, was to free all the implements of production, to free the stock and the buildings in which the stock was raised. Then why should the buildings which house the men who work the stock be rated? There again, it seems to me, we have travelled a long way since the Chancellor of the Exchequer introduced his proposals.
There are two reasons for not rating these farm servants' houses. There is the one to which I have referred and also the bad state of housing and the need to give every incentive to the proper development of housing in Scotland. I differ from the hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren) on the practical point of the effect of the Amendment. On the whole, proceeding on the lines upon which the Government are proceeding, accepting the unsatisfactory foundation of that scheme, I am inclined to think that it would do more damage to the prospect of getting improved farm servants' houses if we passed this Amendment than if we did not; but I agree with the hon. Member that it is quite true that, if we proceed on these lines, inevitably, as houses are provided, they will go into the valuation roll, they will be valued, and rates will go up in respect of them. Therefore, unless it is perfectly clear, as it ought to be made clear, that farm servants' houses, the houses which house
the men who work the farms, are to be taken out of the area of assessment, you will not be giving the full impetus which you might to the improvement of farm servants' houses in Scotland.
To what does the Chancellor's speech boil down? The right hon. Gentleman tells us definitely that they have abandoned the principle of de-rating houses and buildings and land. That principle has gone by the board. It is no longer there. The principle now is definitely that in future farmers are to be rated, instead of on one-quarter, on one-sixth; and, therefore, the amount of relief which they will receive by the measures produced by the Government will be one-quarter minus one-sixth, or one-twelfth. We were told by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in magniloquent phrases that all the burden of rates was swept off land and buildings, and it boils down to a vulgar fraction, to a relief amounting to one-twelfth. This is not carrying into effect the Government's declarations. It is an admission of failure. I suppose it is a financial failure. I suppose the money cannot be found, but, at any rate, it is an admission of failure. It is a retreat, and a retreat that is sounded only in the case of Scotland and not in the case of England.
I would like to refer to the position of the small landholders in Scotland. They are now free from rates on all their improvements. They are entered in the valuation roll at the fair rent which may exclude buildings altogether, and will exclude any proportion of the buildings on the farm which the landholder has provided for himself, that it to say, they pay rent only in respect of the buildings provided by the proprietor, and that proportion varies indefinitely. Let us take the simplest case, that of the man who owns all the buildings and who is, therefore, rated only on his land. There are three ways in which the Government might deal with this case. They might tear up all existing arrangements, destroy his existing rights, and merely value him on one-sixth of his land and buildings. I do not think the Government intend to do that, but I gave the Secretary of State for Scotland notice that I was going to ask this question, and if he will let me know the answer, I should like to know whether they intend to tear up his existing rights and rate him on the whole valuation as it is,
on his house and buildings, or do they not? I hope they do not.
There are two other ways, and it seems to me, from the answer which the Secretary of State gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Sir E. Hamilton), that they are going to take this method. They are going to say that they will rate the crofter on one-sixth of the valuation of the land only. If they do that, they will be rating him in respect of his buildings on that one-sixth of his land. If it is still the policy of the Government to de-rate the land, they are rating that crofter on one-sixth in respect of his buildings, and that is exactly what, under existing legislation, he is exempt from. It may be, on the other hand, that the Government intend to sweep off all rates on the crofter and to say that that man is entitled to be exempt in respect of his buildings and in respect of his residence, to which the Chancellor of the Exchequer referred, and, therefore, they must not levy rates on him' at all. If that is so, that will indeed be satisfactory, but if, in the case of the man where the whole or practically the whole of his rent is in respect of his land, they intend to rate him on one-sixth of the entry in the valuation roll, there will be an obvious unfairness.
Take the case of two smallholders. Take A and B with exactly similar holdings and rents. In A's case the proprietor has put up all the buildings. A's capital, therefore, has remained free. He, of course, will have to pay merely in respect of one-sixth of his land and buildings. Now look at the case of B, who has sunk all his capital in his buildings. Perhaps he has borrowed his capital and paid interest on it. He has done it on the understanding that, according to Section 36 of the 1911 Act, he is exempt from rates. Therefore, if you come along and rate him on one-sixth of his value in the valuation roll, you will be treating him the same as A, who has not sunk his capital in his buildings, and who has never had that guarantee of exemption which B possesses under Section 36 of the 1911 Act.
Then there is the case of the smallholders settled after the War. They are settled on holdings, but the buildings have been obtained by bonds representing money borrowed from the Board. The
entry in the valuation roll is in respect of the land alone. Therefore, there is no entry in respect of buildings. Those men have gone to great expense and had to buy at high prices, and it would be grossly unfair only to give them this very slight relief of one-twelfth in respect of their holdings. They are entered in the valuation roll in respect of land only. Their entry is not agricultural land in the valuation roll; it is No. So-and-So holding, and they ought to get complete relief in respect of the fact that the only entry in the valuation roll is an entry in respect of land and that there are no buildings in fact on which the Secretary of State has the right to decree that they should be assessed. It would be obviously wrong for the assessor to be asked to assume what is in fact untrue, and obviously untrue, that they have buildings in respect of which they ought to be assessed on one-sixth. As I was saying, these men have these rights which have been given them under the Act of 1911, Section 36, and that is why I differ from the hon. Member for Burslem.
The effect of this Amendment, if carried, would be that these men's houses would be valued. These men's houses, which by an Act of the Liberal party, of which he was a member, I think, in those days, were made exempt from improvements, were made exempt from rating, would, under the provisions of this Amendment, have to be valued, and that is one of the reasons why I cannot support it. The separate valuation would not work. The variations are too great. The variations in the case of each holding, the proportion which is owned by the proprietor and the proportion which is owned by the tenant; it may be anything from 1 per cent. to 99 per cent., it may be the whole or none, and that would make separate valuation in the case of the smallholders practically impossible. There would be exceptional cases in which the separate valuation of the houses would be as much as four-fifths of the whole subject and that is a great reason for not supporting this Amendment.

Mr. MacLAREN: I quite understand what would be the result of the Amendment in that case, but that was not my point.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: I know that the hon. Member does not wish that result brought about, but that would inevitably
be the result if we passed this Amendment. Moreover, whenever the landlord made improvements, it would mean that the rates would go up, and, therefore, improvements would be penalised. For these various reasons, I cannot support the Amendment, but in supporting the attitude of the Secretary of State for Scotland on the Amendment, I would like to draw his attention to the actual terms of the Resolution, to which he referred, which was passed by the Scottish Chambers of Agriculture. It is quite true, as he said, that they passed a Resolution in favour of a fixed proportion of annual value, but the Resolution goes on:
subject to the proportion being made one-twelfth, or at all events not more than the proportion to be rated in England,
and that is a very important proviso. The Secretary of State for Scotland said that there must be some small anomalies, and that he was not going to be frightened by them, but if he goes on with his proportion of one-sixth, the anomalies will be gross and startling. The hon. Baronet, the Member for Forfar (Sir H. Hope), took the example of farms rented at £900. I will take a much lower figure, £600. According to the Secretary of State's figure, that would mean that the farmer's residence would be valued at £100. Most of the mansions in the country are not valued at £100. It would be three or four times the valuation of houses of a similar character and size in the towns. Anomalies like that could hardly be referred to in the complacent way in which the Secretary of State referred to them.
Then the right hon. Gentleman said that he wished the relief which is to be afforded by the methods which he proposed to be at least as large as the relief afforded by the English methods. Let me remind him of the rules adopted by the Central Valuation Committee under the Rating and Valuation Act, 1925. According to these rules, the farmer's residence is valued at 60 per cent. of one-eighth of the gross rent, which is equal to three-fortieths, or rather less than one-thirteenth. Therefore it seems to me that the Scottish Chamber of Agriculture, in putting forward the suggestion of one-twelfth, is making by no means an exaggerated demand. To be put on a level with England, we must
get the proportion reduced to one-twelfth. That I think would be generally fair all over the country. Even then there would be anomalies. It would mean that some large farmers would be paying on a very high scale. The rents of 90 per cent. of the smallholders in Sutherland are under £5; under the Secretary of State's scheme they would pay on a maximum valuation of 16s. 8d., so that the total relief which they will receive is 3s. or 4s. a year, and the Secretary of State can afford to be generous to the smallholders if he can only rake in one big farmer and make him pay on a high valuation. However that may be, I agree that if you proceed on these lines, you must have a fixed proportion. That should not be more than one-twelfth. In the case of smallholders, who are, by Section 36 of the 1911 Act, exempt from the payment of rates in respect of houses, and in the ease of ex-service men, who have been settled by the Board of Agriculture, and who had to buy their improvements at high prices after the War, they should be exempt altogether from rates.

Mr. R. W. SMITH: I am rather in a difficulty after what the hon. Baronet has just said as to how to deal with the Amendment, because he seemed to think that by supporting it one was saying that the Government must value the houses separately. I am in favour of the percentage, but it seems to me that there is nothing to hinder the percentage being taken and entered in the valuation roll. The Amendment says:
in the case of agricultural land and heritages, the value of the house and cottages situated thereon shall be shown separately from the value of the agricultural land.
If they are shown separately, they can be valued according to a percentage, whatever the percentage may be, or they can be valued in subjects and just be entered in the valuation roll.

Mr. MacLAREN: The Amendment says that the house and cottages shall be shown separately.

Mr. SMITH: The question is how are you to arrive at the value of the house which is to be shown on the valuation roll? Is it the percentage which is to be shown on the actual value as assessed by the assessor? Either of these things can be shown on the valuation roll. I am supporting this Amendment because it is
fair. The real understanding which we got when the Chancellor of the Exchequer made his speech, and what we want in Scotland, was that agricultural land should be de-rated entirely. Now we have a totally different position, and land is to pay a part on a fraction. The point has been made that it is the duty of tenants of agricultural holdings to pay something towards local rates. In my constituency there are many cases of parcels of land valued from £3 to £4 up to £16, all of which are agricultural land, and are worked by people living in a house. These people are paying rates at the present time. If you are to be fair to them, you must take their houses as houses on the land, and rate them at one-sixth of the value of the land, as if these houses belonged to that land. We are told that we are going to de-rate land. Then let us do it and be fair about it. I am supporting this Amendment because agricultural land without any buildings in England is to be de-rated, and the Secretary of State for Scotland had said that he was concerned in giving for Scotland relief for agriculture equal to the relief granted in England. Scottish Members, if they are to do their duty, must see that the same relief is given to Scottish land as is given to English land. I should like to quote from the speech of the Secretary of State for Scotland which he made on 7th June:
The Government, therefore, propose to relieve the tenant of the rates which he at present pays upon the land, and to relieve the owner of part of the rates which he pays on his section, and put in a provision by which a half of the relief which the owner receives shall, during the existing tenancy, be passed on to the tenant. I should like hon. Members to realise that the tenant will be relieved of the burden of rates on the one-fourth which he is at present paying on the land, and that the owner will be relieved of the rates which he is paving on the three-quarters."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 7th June, 1928; cols. 376–7. Vol. 218.]
That is a reasonable plan. I thought that agricultural land was to be de-rated, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself has admitted that agriculture is a productive industry. He said that as far as Scotland is concerned certain separate arrangements would be required where the incidence of rates and the general conditions differed from those of England. We knew that separate plans would be made for Scotland, but now we find that
in the Scottish valuation rolls the houses are not to be separately valued. The Secretary of State said:
If we were now to adopt the same system as is followed in England, and proceed to value each individual farm and cottage throughout the whole of Scotland, it would be not only a lengthy but a difficult business, and would lead in some circumstances, particularly in the case of the smaller farms and holdings, possibly to an increase and not a decrease in the burden of rates on the individual.
He further said:
If I have made myself clear, therefore, we propose to deal with agricultural land by totally de-rating the land and leaving the rates upon houses and cottages to be levied on one-sixth of the gross rental."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 7th June, 1928; cols. 377–8, Vol. 218.]
That is the case where there were houses on farms, and that will be a perfectly reasonable thing. I would appeal to the Secretary of State that it is only fair that we should receive the same treatment as England, and that land with no houses on it should be totally de-rated and that where there are houses they should be valued at a fraction. I do not say what the fraction should be. All I can contend is that land on which there are no houses should be de-rated. In the case of land on which there are no houses, it might be said that some time there will be houses, and that it will be reasonable when the houses come to rate one-sixth of the value. There is a question which I would like to put to the Secretary of State. Are we to assume that woodlands are to be de-rated entirely?
For the reasons I have given, I hope that the Secretary of State will see his way to accept this Amendment. The Amendment does not say that the valuation shall be the aggregate valuation. All it says is that it shall be shown. If we have the valuation shown on the valuation roll, we shall be able, when the other Bill comes on, to find the proper proportion.

6.0 p.m.

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: It is interesting to find that the hon. Member for North Lanark (Sir A. Sprot) and the hon. Member for Forfar (Sir H. Hope) arrived by different roads at the same point as was reached by my hon. Friend the Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren), and they must now be watching their Amendments with great care, because they must realise that while all three arrived
at the same point they did not reach it for the same reason, nor did they all intend to proceed from that point to the same goal. This is a question of getting a basis for the apportionment of a certain amount of relief, and I would like to give the Committee some figures which may fortify the hon. Member for North Lanark in supporting his contention, although not his Amendment. I will not give the Committee the whole of the figures, although I will hand them over to the Secretary of State for Scotland, but I have here an analysis of the effects of this particular Amendment, if the Amendment means, as I think it did mean, that both Scotland and England should be treated on the same basis, that is, that agricultural land should be totally exempt from rates, and only the houses rated.
Here is the case of a farm at a rental of just over £l,000. At present it pays on £270. Under the Secretary of State's arrangement it would pay on one-sixth, that is £180, so even there the farmer gets the advantage of £90; but if he were assessed on the English system, that is, paying no rates on anything except a house, he would pay on an assessment of £80 only, as against £180. I take it that is the meaning behind the Amendment of the hon. Member for North Lanark. The figure I have given includes the farmhouse and cottages. Farm B is rented at £1,320. At the moment the occupier pays on £330. Under the Secretary of State's scheme he would pay on £220; if the house and cottages were de-rated he would pay on £83. Take the case of the third farm, the rental of which is £600. At the moment that farmer pays on £150; under the new proposal he will pay on £100; but if the house and cottages only were assessed he would pay on £57.
I quote these figures because they are important as backing up the argument advanced from all parts of the House, whatever may be said on the merits of this Amendment, that there can be no question that the allowance of one-sixth does not approximate to the amount of relief in England. I will now give the Committee figures relating to one or two smaller farms. There is one with a total rental of about £420. The present rates are on £105. On a basis of one-sixth the amount would be £70, but if the basis of rating were the English basis the total rateable value would be £32. There is a wide margin between the figures under
the scheme of the Secretary of State and the actual valuation of the farm cottages and the buildings. The reason why we cannot support the Amendment is this: We agree with the hon. and gallant Member for North Lanark that if agricultural land is to be relieved the Scottish farm tenant or occupying owner ought to have precisely the same relief, comparatively speaking, as his English colleagues. All will gain, of course, with the possible exception of the crofters. As the hon. and gallant Member for Caithness (Sir A. Sinclair) has said, there is some dubiety as to whether or not the one-sixth is going to apply to the buildings belonging to a crofter not now rated. Let us suppose it is not the intention now to rate those buildings. It is quite clear that the application of the one-sixth would bring clear gain all round, and the question is not whether it is going to be fair as between the large farmer, the small farmer and the crofter, but whether it will be fair in comparison with what their English colleagues are receiving. That is the point at issue.
As far as I can find out from figures given to me, I am inclined to think that 70 per cent. of the agriculturists north of the Border will gain on the one-sixth equally with their English colleagues, but the other 30 per cent. will undoubtedly be worse off, comparatively, than their English colleagues. I cannot give the rating authorities of Scotland the temptation to make separate assessments of houses and cottages, because that would be a direct temptation to them to rate them in future, but I do strongly press upon the Secretary of State for Scotland to consider the figures I have given, and those given by the hon. Member who moved the Amendment, not in support of a separate apportionment of houses and cottages, but in support of the overwhelming case in favour of treating Scottish farmers in the same way as agriculturists are treated beyond the Border.

Brigadier-General CHARTERIS: I think hon. Members in all parts of the Committee are more or less agreed that even if we accept the factorial system we shall be in a position to give figures and arguments to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland which will prove conclusively that the figure of one-sixth is not sufficient. It is remarkable how various Members, though
approaching this question from different angles, are, with the exception of the Mover and Seconder of the Amendment, all genuinely in favour of the factorial system. Some of the arguments used at the outset of his speech by the hon. and gallant Member for Caithness (Sir A. Sinclair) appeared to be an attack on the general proposals of the Government. As I have a Liberal candidate opposed to me at the election, I rejoiced, because if the Liberal party were really to commit themselves to opposition to this proposal I feel that my ammunition locker would be replenished. But though personally I should therefore have welcomed his opposition, I was glad, for the sake of the country, that as the speech developed, instead of opposing the proposal, he appeared to be, in the end, one of its warmest admirers. The hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren) also advanced some objections, but these were based mainly, I think, on misconceptions, as was promptly pointed out to him by the hon. and gallant Member for Caithness. He talked about anomalies, but, after all, the biggest anomaly that this House has to face, is the fact that the hon. Member for Burslem should be sitting on the benches of the Opposition above the Gangway, for he is in no sense except in name united to them.
Regarding the general question, there is no doubt whatsoever that at the present moment there is a general feeling that Scotland has not got all that was promised in the original speeches made in this House on this subject. I think that feeling is wrong, and that it is largely due to a confusion of terms. In the speeches with which the proposal was first submitted to the House words were undoubtedly used stating that agricultural land was to be totally de-rated, and many in Scotland have got that firmly into their minds. In most cases it is undoubtedly true that agricultural land is being so de-rated, but there are exceptions, especially where a parcel of land has no house on it; that is not, of course, being totally de-rated, according to what my right hon. Friend has said. In the main, however, it is perfectly correct to say that agricultural land is being derated by the proposals of the Government under the factorial system, and in any case it is obvious that even if the
present factor is not sufficient, you can get some factor which will entirely de-rate agricultural land when applied to the whole subject. It is only a question of arranging what the factor should be, so that all agricultural land, with the solitary exception of parcels of land on which there are no houses, or woodlands on which there are no houses, shall be entirely de-rated. A factor so great as to de-rate all our agricultural land may, of course, be such as it would be beyond the means of the Treasury to meet, and we are bound to face the fact that there must be anomalies; especially there is the case of large farms which, while they will benefit, will not benefit proportionately to the same extent as small farms. That I do not regard with any great regret because I personally welcome the fact that if there must be inequality the scales are to be definitely weighed down in favour of the small farmer, and I go farther; I do not think the large farmers themselves will object to this bias.
I have talked with a number of large farmers since this proposal was introduced and, in common with other Scottish Members, I have received a good deal of correspondence from large farmers and other people pointing out objections. They have pointed out that they were not going to get the full benefit of the proposals, measured either in the terms of the benefits which England is going to get or in terms of the benefit which the small farmer was going to get; but as time has gone on almost all their objections have disappeared, and, I say it to their credit, the large farmers have definitely stated that they will not object to receiving rather less than their smaller colleagues in the agricultural industry, provided that they are convinced that the industry as a whole in Scotland is going to receive as much as the industry in England. I think it is the business of Scottish Members of all parties to see that Scotland does get at least as full a measure of assistance from the Government, in proportion to its size, as does England. I am certain that any proposal of that sort, if it be backed up with figures, and not with assertions only, will receive the general sympathy of my right hon. Friends, and, I am encouraged to hope, the assent of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. What we Scottish Members have to do at the moment is to endeavour to give figures
which will enable my right hon. Friend to arrive at the appropriate factor. The hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) gave some very valuable figures which, although they did not surprise anyone who had gone into the subject, will, I think, be of great value to my right hon. Friend and to the Scottish Office in arriving at the appropriate factor to apply to the industry in Scotland.
I would like to say a word about a proposal which was made by the hon. Member for Central Aberdeen (Mr. R. W. Smith) on the subject of the rolls. He appeared to wish that certain values of farmhouses and cottages should be put in the valuation roll even though they were not really the assessed values but only the values arrived at as the result of a factorial assessment. This would only give the result of a fairly simple mathematical calculation—by dividing the total subject by six and showing what was one-sixth and what was five-sixths. I cannot think that is sufficient reason for supporting the Amendment. I will finish by making an appeal to the hon. Member who moved the Amendment and the hon. Member who seconded it to withdraw it. I think the Committee generally is agreed that the factorial system is not only the best but the only practical system. It can serve no useful purpose, either in this House or out of it, to leave on the Paper or to carry to a Division, or even to allow to be negatived without a Division an Amendment of this nature. As seen by the country, the Amendment can have only one of two results. The big farmers may say: "Here are certain Members fighting our case for us," or, on the other hand, small farmers may say: "Here are Members who are fighting against our own particular interests." Is that desirable? From a national point of view, surely it is far better that the House as a whole, having now considered this problem for the best part of a Parliamentary day, and having arrived at almost universal agreement that the factorial system is the best system, and that, properly applied, it can produce something so near complete justice as to satisfy even the demands of Scottish Members—and that is saying a good deal—should be united in recommending that system to
Scotland. If my hon. Friends withdraw the Amendment, Scotland will know that we in this House are doing our best for her interests, and we can then proceed to the far more important problem of deciding the factor to be applied.

Sir J. GILMOUR: The hon. and gallant Member for Caithness (Sir A. Sinclair) has raised the question of the treatment of the crofters. As I understand the position, we shall not, under these proposals, take away from the crofters any of the rights which they enjoy at the present time. The crofter will merely pay one-sixth upon the gross rental which is entered or may be entered from time to time in the valuation roll. I think that on reconsideration the hon. and gallant Member will agree that, as in the rest of the country—in the great Highland districts there is an increasing body of crofters and there may be a still bigger increase in the future—it is unreasonable that these people holding under these terms, while safeguarded and given certain benefits which the State has said that they should have from time to time, should not pay in some small measure towards those local services which are of increasing benefit to them and their families. I think, in these circumstances, we may take it that there will be no unfairness to them.
The hon. Member for Central Aberdeen (Mr. E. W. Smith) raised the subject of lands on which there are no houses. I appreciate that point of view and the difficulty which it raises, but, as I have already said, in my judgment it is so small in proportion to the other advantages which are going to be gained under this Clause, that it is just and reasonable that those who hold the ground without buildings upon it should pay their contribution. There is also the question of the woodlands. As I understand it, the woodlands are separately entered and shown in the valuation roll to-day. As that differentiation is made now, it leaves it open in the case of any future Bill for the adoption of any methods which hon. Members may advise the Government are suitable in dealing with that subject. I am grateful to hon. Members for the way in which they have treated this subject. We have had a very valuable discussion which will help to clear our minds, and I hope the hon.
Member who moved this Amendment will withdraw it.

Sir A. SPROT: My right hon. Friend has just told us that woodlands are shown definitely in the valuation roll. That is quite true, and therefore it is open in some future Bill for the Government to cause woodlands to be rated in Scotland when they are not being rated in England. All I can say about that is that I do not think it is going to be done. I am here to stick up for the rights of Scotland, and to see that she gets her just demands as compared with England. With regard to what fell from the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston) about the improvement of farm labourers' cottages, I think that no man has that question more at heart than I have, and many of us have not only been talking on this subject, but we have done something in that direction in our own particular spheres. I do not believe that what the hon. Member put forward is an argument which has the slightest validity. The hon. Member for Dundee said that if you fix the rating on a farm at one-sixth, if you build a fine, new house upon that farm the rates will not go up and the rating will not be increased, but if you add it on the value of the building then the landowner will be deterred from building new houses. Farm labourers' cottages are valued in the Scottish valuation roll at about £4 a year and an extra good cottage may be valued at £6 a year. If you build a particularly swagger cottage it might be valued at £10, but is anybody going to tell me that any proprietor having some £500 or £600 to spare for the erection of a fine new cottage, and having made up his mind that he wants to engage an extra man, will be deterred from building that cottage by the consideration that his rates will go up by a few shillings for two, three or four years? That is absurd, and I do not think a consideration of that kind would enter into the matter at all.
Some time ago we appointed a Costings Commission, and they brought out the cost of an extra ploughman and two horses on a farm. Take, for example, a case where a man employed six ploughmen, and he wanted to employ seven and work an extra pair of horses. The cost
of engaging an extra man and running an extra pair of horses would be something like £500, but the cost in the rates on the cottage would be something quite negligible. The Secretary of State for Scotland promised to go into this question still further, and he said he would like to have the figures. I have some figures from a reliable source. The hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) has given figures relating to a large farm of £800 a year. Let me give to the Committee the figure of £100 a year of a holding with one house upon it and no cottages. In this case the occupier is paying £6 5s. in rates. Under the English system he would have to pay only £l 17s. 6d., and he would be a very great gainer under the system which I propose. Under my right hon. Friend's proposal of one-sixth, this same occupier would have to pay £4 3s. 4d., and if the fraction were one-eighth, his rates would amount to £3 2s. 6d. So even if you take the fraction of one-eighth you do not get anything like the English system.
I think that I have established my original proposition that Scotland is not being treated fairly in this matter. We are told that agricultural land is going to be de-rated. It seems to me that it will be de-rated in England, but apparently not in Scotland. The proof of that is that land upon which no houses have been built will still have to pay rates in Scotland, and that will not be the case in England. With regard to woodlands, the right hon. Gentleman did not make any pronouncement. Surely it is not proposed that woodlands in Scotland should pay rates while in England they will not be rated. In case my proposals are put into force, it would be necessary to have all these entries in the valuation roll. If they are not put in, and if my Amendment is not accepted, then the proposal which I have adumbrated will fall to the ground. Therefore, I shall ask the Committee to take the responsibility of negativing this proposal. I shall not press it to a division, and I shall not withdraw it.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee proceeded to a Division.

There being no Members willing to act as Tellers for the Ayes, the Chairman declared that the Noes had it.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. James Hope): The next two Amendments on the Paper have been covered by the discussion on the last Amendment:
In page 9, line 26, at end, insert the words:
grass parks and agricultural land on which there is no house to be valued separately."—[Sir A. Sprot.]
In page 9, line 26, at end, insert the words:
and, in the case of agricultural lands and heritages on which there are no houses, the valuation roll shall show by some distinguishing mark which of these lands and heritages are of less than four acres in extent."—[Mr. B. W. Smith.]

Sir J. GILMOUR: I beg to move, in page 9, line 27, to leave out the word "any," and to insert instead thereof the word "industrial."
This Amendment and the one which follows it standing in my name are really drafting Amendments.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 9, line 29, after the word "or," insert the words "where freight-transport lands and heritages."—[Sir J. Gilmour.]

The CHAIRMAN: The next Amendment in the name of the right hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. W. Adamson)—in page 9, line 35, at end, insert the words:
shall be granted the relief provided for in this Act, as from the first day of October, nineteen hundred and twenty-eight"—
is foreign to the Bill. The Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown)—in page 9, line 40, to leave out the word "whose," and to insert instead thereof the word "where"—is merely to correct something which has already been corrected.

Mr. E. BROWN: I do not know whether it is a mistake in drafting, but the word "whose" appears, not only in my copy of the Bill, but in that of those who were concerned with me in discussing the dock and transport arrangements.

The CHAIRMAN: In my copy of the Bill the word is "where."

Mr. BROWN: On a point of Order. May I ask whether, once a Bill is printed, anyone, without an Amendment made by the House, has the right to alter it? If
that be so, it seems to be a very serious departure. I do not mean that it is so in this case, but it might be very serious. As I have said, in my own copy of the Bill the word is "whose," and that word also appeared in the copy used by the Dock Commission when the Bill was discussed some three weeks ago.

The CHAIRMAN: I have the pleasure of telling the hon. Member that he is right. I see that in the official copy of the Bill the word "whose" still appears, and, therefore, I will call upon the hon. Member to move his Amendment.

Mr. BROWN: I beg to move, in page 9, line 40, to leave out the word "whose," and to insert instead thereof the word "where."
The word "whose" would disintegrate the whole freight-transport arrangement.

Mr. HARRIS: It is a matter of principle affecting the House if the officials, or anyone else, can alter words without authority, and, if anything of the kind were allowed to be done, it might on some other occasion seriously affect the procedure.

The CHAIRMAN: If a misprint is pretty obvious I think that that can be done, but, if the hon. Member wishes to raise it as a matter of principle, it should be done in the House; it cannot be done here.

Amendment agreed to.

Sir J. GILMOUR: I beg to move, in page 10, line 43, at the end, to insert the words:
or to any valuation roll for any year subsequent to the year beginning the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and twenty-nine.
The intention, both in England and in Scotland, is that the Inland Revenue shall concern itself with the valuation only in the first year, and this Amendment is required in order to give effect to that.

Amendment agreed to.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND (Mr. Mac Robert): I beg to move, in page 11, line 9, at the end, to insert the words:
(11) Minerals which are being worked shall for the purposes of this Act be deemed to be lands and heritages occupied and used as a mine.
In Scotland the word "minerals" is commonly used to describe a mine, and the assessors in Scotland think that this may possibly give rise to some difficulty. This Amendment makes it quite clear that minerals where they are being worked are to be included in the definition of a mine, so that there should now be no difficulty at all in this respect.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 1, after the word "shall," to insert the word "not."
This Amendment of the Solicitor-General's raises very large issues, and the hon. and learned Gentleman must not be allowed to smuggle it through the Committee. My Amendment to the proposed Amendment seeks to prevent the mineral royalty owner from receiving any relief at all from public money. There is a very large public opinion which does not believe that the mineral royalty owner should be compensated in any way out of public funds, and there is a very large public opinion which holds very keenly that the mineral royalty owner should be given a time limit to clear out before the State sends the policeman after him. By this Bill, however, the mineral royalty owner is to receive public money by way of rate relief, under the pretext that this is going to assist and facilitate industry. In the Glasgow City area these mineral royalty owners are already allowed deductions of 47½ per cent. A mineral royalty owner whose annual income from mineral royalties is £1,000 is at present only rated upon £525. Under the proposal of the Government he is only to be rated on £250. In the case of the mineral royalty owner, the man who sleeps but thrives, the man who has sunk no capital, who contributes nothing whatever to the success of the coalmining industry, who is a slug and a parasite, we are actually asked to reduce his rating subject from £1,000 to £250, at a time when the collier's house is not to receive a penny of reduction, when the poor tenant is not to receive a penny of reduction, when the shopkeeper is not to receive a penny of reduction, when the public utility service is not to receive a penny of reduction. Parliamentary words almost fail me to describe what I think of the proposal to
reduce the local rating upon the mineral royalty owner.
It is perfectly true that in Scotland as a whole the average reduction is not 47½ per cent. at present, but 5 per cent. Nevertheless, under the proposals of the Government, the mineral royalty owner is to get a reduction of 75 per cent., and, therefore, all the £1,000 men are only to be rated on £250. There is this difference between England and Scotland, that it is highly questionable whether the man who calls himself a mineral royalty owner has any legal title at all to take a penny. I am not arguing about England at all, but in Scotland an Act, which I have here, was passed in the old Scottish Parliament, an Act of James VI, passed in 1592, not a line of which, as was admitted by the Lord Advocate in cross-examination before the Coal Industry Commission, has been repealed. By that Act it was declared:
That the right of all mines pertains to His Majesty and His Highness's predecessor.

Mr. HARDIE: He has died since then.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I am expressing no opinion as to whether or not he is being resurrected; I am stating an historical fact, namely, that, by the Act of 1592, it was declared to be the law of Scotland that all mines and all metals were the property of the Crown, and could only be worked on a Crown lease, the lessee fining to the Crown an annual sum. That Act has never been repealed, and, in cross-examination before the Coal Industry Commission, it was admitted that the right to mine for coal was held directly from the Crown. You find feu charters granted in 1618 by King James giving the right to mine for coal on condition that one-tenth of all the value raised was handed back to the Crown. That has continued, certainly implicitly——

The CHAIRMAN: We cannot now embark on a discussion of the whole subject of Scottish law. It seems to me that, if the hon. Member's contention be right, no rates at all ought to be paid on these minerals, because they belong to the Crown, and the Crown only pays rates, in England at any rate, by its own bounty.

Mr. JOHNSTON: With great deference, I am submitting here that, if this proposal of the Government is to be put into an Act of Parliament now, and if it is to be for the first time declared by Act of Parliament to be legal, then, although we are taking something from the owners of minerals, we are giving them rights which have never hitherto been legally admitted. I am submitting that, if we allow this opportunity to pass without protest, we are admitting that the old Act of 1592 has been scrapped, and we do not propose to admit that that is so. I certainly do not wish to prolong the discussion on this point, but I should like to say that as late as 1842, or certainly as late as 1840, the Lord Advocate of that day was prosecuting alleged royalty owners for taking these royalties. The Lord Advocate of the day issued warrants declaring that these royalties were the property of the Crown and ought not to be privately appropriated at all, and we come across some very dexterous manipulations in another place to prevent actual prosecutions, resulting in fines, or, it might be, imprisonment.
Now, for the first time, we have a Government bringing in legislation whereby this old Act of 1592, which declared the Crown to be the sole owner of all mines and metals found in Scotland, is being silently abrogated, so that henceforth the crimes of the mineral royalty owners, who have taken their illicit moneys for all these years, who have defrauded the State and the revenues of the Crown, are to be commuted on condition that they pay a small fraction to the State, and this small fraction of their plunder is to be relieved of rates to the extent of 75 per cent. Will the right hon. Gentleman tell as what in Heaven's name is the purpose in production fulfilled by the mineral royalty owner? Does he assist industry in any way? Where and how does he help the productivity of the country? He does not do so a bit, because he is a slug on the business, a sucker, and now, when we are getting back from him a small amount in local rates, the present Government steps in and relieves him to the extent of three-fourths of that sum. I move this Amendment so that, in Scotland at any rate, the mineral royalty owner may not be relieved of any proportion of his local rates.

Mr. E. BROWN: I very remarkable point arises in connection with the omission of this word from the drafting. When I put a question to the right hon. Gentleman as to the amount of relief to be given to mines and minerals, I based it on the memorandum issued by the Scottish Office in connection with the valuation of 1926, and there the definition was mines and minerals. The answer to the question was that nearly £400,000 was the estimated total of rates paid by mines and minerals. I now hold in my hand the latest paper, which I have got at last, dealing with the yield of properties, and I find the basis there is very different. Instead of having the figures of the estimated rates on the various properties, and the figures for mines and minerals, just as this word "minerals" has been left out from this draft, so it has been left out and another word inserted, and we have here the amount for the burghs of Scotland for mines and quarries—not minerals—some £33,000 and £330,000 for the landward area, making a total of £360,000. Is this new classification in the White Paper, as compared with the earlier one, the result of dropping the word "minerals" from the definition and a desire to keep from the House the knowledge of how much of this 75 per cent. of relief is actually to go to the productive part of the mine and how much to the rateable value of the minerals? It seems very strange that in two successive White Papers we should have had, first the answer given on the basis of mines and minerals, and then on mines and quarries. Certainly, I agree with the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston) that since the word "minerals" has been left out it should be a thoroughly good precedent for England and we ought to omit the rating relief for the minerals and give it to the productive part of the industry, the mines. Since the draftsman has left it out, the Committee will be wise if it continues to leave it out.

Mr. HARDIE: People who have been reading about the Bill have been led to believe that what is being done by it is to help industry. The Secretary of State has been challenged by my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston) to define what contribution the royalty owner makes to industry.
From practical experience, I know what it means, after you have worked 10 hours, as I did, to realise that when you have finished your day's work there is a royalty owner somewhere, who never saw the mine and never knew the coal was there until a scientist pointed it out to him, and yet we are now being told that to help industry we have further to subsidise a blood-sucker who sucks the blood of industry. I cannot understand what is meant by this royalty. I think the reason it was called a royalty was to associate it with all that royalty means. A royalty on minerals means that when an industrialist, through his activity, supplies the needs of the people, we have this useless blood-sucker called a mineral owner, and then a royalty owner, saying that before the nation can have the use of God's materials to make the things they need to live by, you have to allow him to suck your blood. It is not a small thing. Seventy-five is being arranged for now by the under suckers of the blood-sucker, because, in legal phraseology, we know what aiding and abetting means, especially if you are in the witness box. The Secretary of State always shunts a plain straightforward question like that. I have often wondered whether it is that he cannot answer or that he will not. If he is intimate with history, especially Scottish history, he will realise that there is no basis in law for a royalty being paid in Scotland. I challenge him, or the Solicitor-General, to show where a royalty was ever made legal.

The CHAIRMAN: If it cannot be exacted, it is obvious that it cannot be rated, and the whole argument falls.

Mr. HARDIE: What I am pointing out is that there is no right. We are trying to rectify a wrong. On what ground can the Secretary of State bring forward this relief? It is not a relief to the man who is getting the minerals, or a condition that must obtain before the royalty-owner can get the relief. It does not increase the purchasing power of the miner. The miners in Scotland are being crushed down to the lowest standard of living, and their children three times a day have bread and margarine, or bread and
dripping, and you give 75 per cent. to the blood-suckers living in their big houses, waiting on the miners' blood-money, because that is what it comes to in the end. I am ashamed to think there are royalty-owners in this House who do not get up and say: "I will have none of your filthy money." You have these gentlemen preaching about morals and going to church on Sundays, but putting their hands right down for the further 75 per cent. They know the state of the mining industry, and they know the state of poverty of these people. We have all that lingers in this thing called "royalty," from the top of the rotten tree right down to its rotten roots—these suckers. I hope before this goes to a vote we shall have answers to the questions I have put. I hope we are going to have some statement to show upon what grounds, legal or otherwise, the Government is going to put forward a relief of 75 per cent. to the most obvious robbery.

Mr. SHINWELL: A surprising feature of this discussion is the simplicity with which the Solicitor-General introduced the subject. He comes to that Box in the most innocent fashion like a mere novice as to the political and legal aspects of the situation, and asks us surreptitiously to accept this proposal. However bland he may be, we are at least not blind to the implications of this proposal. The very least we are entitled to expect from him is some explanation of the effect of these proposals, not only as regards the ultimate disposal of the monies intended to be devoted to relief purposes but also as to its effect upon various individuals concerned. We are entitled to expect some clear lead from the Solicitor-General as to the legality of such a proposal. Clearly, before he can ask us to accept it, he must prove that those who are to be the recipients of the relief are entitled to the property, the rates on which are to be relieved.

The CHAIRMAN: I have pointed out that this really cannot arise, because, if they are not entitled to the property, they cannot be rated upon it.

Mr. SHINWELL: I anticipated, as no doubt my hon. Friends did, that that objection might be raised.

Mr. MacLAREN: On a point of Order. If the point you raise now is a point of substance, surely the Government's
Amendment must fail? If the royalty owner has no right to relief, the Government's Amendment cannot be debated.

The CHAIRMAN: I should be very sorry indeed to give any ruling upon English law, much less upon Scottish. Of course, if the contention is correct, and only the Crown has a right to the minerals, and people are getting an illegal income, obviously that could be tested in the Courts, and they could be deprived of it. But if they were deprived of it, they could not pay rates on it. I think we must assume for the purposes of the argument that they can legally—whether morally or not I do not determine—receive royalties and be rated on them. How far they can be relieved from rates is now the point.

7.0 p.m.

Mr. SHINWELL: You, Sir, have stated one part of the case accurately. The position of the Government, as I understand it, is that they assume the legality of this proposal. I am much more concerned about the wisdom of the further proposal to relieve these illegal mineral and royalty owners of their rates, and I want to put one or two points to the Solicitor-General. How much of this relief is to be devoted to mines and how much to minerals? And will there follow any reduction in the royalties now charged on the production of coal? If it is intended to devote this money to the relief of industry, surely it must be proved that the mineral owner, as a result of participating in the reduction of rates, will pass it on to the mineowner, and then to industry, so that industry itself can be relieved. We are entitled to some clarity from the Solicitor-General on these matters. I also want to put a further point to him. I would like to hear from him how we are to distinguish in respect of the relief provisions as between the royalty owner qua royalty owner, and the royalty owner who is also the owner of the mine. As is well known, mining undertakings have taken possession of royalties and, as far as I can see, there is no clear line of demarcation. I cannot understand, apart from the morality of this issue, why the Solicitor-General should ask us to accept this proposal in this way. We are entitled to have these points clearly elucidated, and I support my hon.
Friend in his demand that, before this proposal passes through Committee, the Solicitor-General, on behalf of the Government, should not only give us the reasons why this proposal is being put forward, but also clear our minds of these perplexities and intricacies which make it impossible to judge as to the wisdom of the issue.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND: The question is as to whether mines are to be relieved of rates. It is not a question of royalty at all. Sub-section (3) of Clause 3 says:
'Mine' has the meaning assigned to it by Section one hundred and twenty-two of the Coal Mines Act, 1911, or Section forty-one of the Metalliferous Mines Regulation Act, 1872.
The result is that practically every possible mine is included. The purpose of Clause 3 is to relieve industrial hereditaments, or industrial lands and heritages, and the three which have been relieved are mines, factories and workshops. The suggestion from the other side is that they do not wish mines to be included. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] I gather that they are with me so far that they want mines to be relieved. In Scotland the law is different from England. You have got the owner and tenant. The rates are assessable on both owner and tenant in Scotland. As regards collieries, those who work them are the tenants of the mines. The suggestion is that they are to get no relief. We say they are to get relief. They pay rent, either a fixed rent or a rent fixed by royalty. That is the rent they pay, and that will probably be more or less the valuation of this particular subject. The owners are assessed at substantially one-half and the tenants at one-half.

Mr. SHINWELL: What do you mean by owner and tenant?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND: As regards lands and heritages in Scotland there must be an owner. If he occupies it himself, there is no tenant, but, if there is a tenant, you have the two classes, the owner and the tenant, and they each pay half. The whole point of the Amendment is this. There is a provision in Scotland that mines and quarries are not to be asssessed or valued if they are not worked. In some cases in Scotland people who have not worked the mine
may in some cases have to pay a fixed rent. If that was left under the word "mine" or "quarry" they would not be able to be assessed. In Scotland, in fact, the assessors have always entered mines or quarries under the word "minerals." I am not sure about quarries, but they have certainly entered mines under that heading. They have not entered "mines" at all, and you will not find "mines" at all in the valuation rolls in Scotland. If the assessors are right in their view, though there is some doubt about it, they wish to make it clear that the word "minerals," which they have been using, is the same thing as the word "mines," so that there may be no doubt about its meaning. They have a doubt about the matter, and they merely wish the meaning to be made clear. If the assessors are right and they require the word "mineral" to go in, then, if you have not the word "mineral" in you are defeating the whole purpose of this Measure with regard to the relief of mines in Scotland. I am sure that is not the wish of the Members on the other side. There is no question in this Bill of royalties or royalty owners. They are landlords, and, undoubtedly, Members opposite do not like landlords. The owners of the minerals are landlords, and they are getting rent, and it is true that they are to be relieved to the extent of 75 per cent. of what they now pay. But they are to hand back that relief, as I understand, to the tenants.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Where is that?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND: It is not in this Bill, because this is a Valuation Bill. We were told by the Minister that there is to be a provision that the landlord shall pass back the whole of the relief, as regards industrial hereditaments, and that as regards agriculture he is to pass back one-half of the relief which he gets.

Mr. SHINWELL: How do you apply it to coal?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND: There is nothing sinister about this particular Amendment. The assessors have said, "We have always been in the habit of putting mines into a valuation roll under the heading
'Minerals,' and therefore we want to be quite clear that mines are included in this Bill." According to the Amendment, only minerals that are being worked are to be included, and minerals that are being worked are the same thing as mines that are being worked. I have said that I do not think the words are necessary, but the feeling in Scotland among these skilled men is that it is desirable that they should go in. There is no other reason why they should go in.

Mr. HARDIE: The hon. and learned Gentleman has just stated that the assessors in Scotland when they are doing their duty look at it from two points, both on the rental basis. You have the superior landlord and the tenant. If that statement be true, will the hon. and learned Gentleman now tell the Committee if there is a single case where the right to work minerals in Scotland is not granted from an overlord of minerals by the ton? Can he give us a case of such an annual rent for working minerals without a specific sum per ton? Can he give a specific illustration?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND: I do not know.

Mr. HARDIE: There is none.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND: It may not be a fair way of fixing rent. As I understand it, a fixed rent is very often specified, but, if the royalty per ton exceeded a fixed rent, then they get royalties. That royalty is paid to the owner of the minerals. He is the landlord and those who are working them are the tenants. This Bill is designed to give the mining industry relief, and the mining industry is going to get relief in the form of a rebate of three-quarters of the rates and, as in Scotland these are paid half by the owner and half by the tenant, it inevitably follows that the relief is given to both. Otherwise you would not be giving the same relief in Scotland as in England.

Mr. SHINWELL: Why not a separate Bill?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND: There may be a separate Bill to deal with the application of relief. This Bill is only to deal with the valuation—with the properties in Scotland to which you will apply the relief.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Will the hon. and learned Gentleman give us a specific pledge that every penny of rating relief which goes to the mineral royalty owner or landowner who owns the mine shall be returned to the colliery company or the individual who works the colliery?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND: I cannot give any pledge at all. The House will require to decide on the question when it comes up. I think the Minister said that as far as existing leases are concerned, the whole of the royalty given to the landlord would be handed over to the tenants. I am speaking subject to correction, but I understood that that was what he said.

Mr. JOHNSTON: May I ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, as this is a question of high policy which ought not to depend upon what some junior Minister understands some other Minister said on another occasion, whether he will give us a specific pledge that the royalty owner and the owner of the land in which these minerals are is not going to benefit by a penny piece of the reduction, but that every penny of such reduction is to be handed back to the company or individual working the minerals?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I thought that when I spoke before I made it clear that, as far as industrial subjects are concerned, factories, mines and quarries, in so far as it happens in Scotland that you have a divided payment of rates, the owner and the occupier, it was the intention of the Government to make provision, during the existing leases, tenancies and agreements, that the whole of the rate relief should be passed on to the occupier for the time being. I stated that on behalf of the Government and I adhere to it. Of course that will come up on the Bill in the autumn, and it will be for the House to decide.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Under existing leases?

Sir J. GILMOUR: That is right.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Then when these existing leases are terminated, we are to understand that the royalty owner or land owner is to receive the full 75 per cent. reduction in his local rates?

Sir J. GILMOUR: When the leases come to an end, of course a new bargain will have to be struck.

Mr. MACLEAN: I have been listening to the duel between the Solicitor-General for Scotland, the Secretary of State for Scotland and the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston). It is rather a triangular duel, like the one of which we read in "Peter Simple." In this case two of the duellists have been evading replying. Neither the Solicitor-General nor the Secretary of State for Scotland has faced the right issue put up by the hon. Member for Dundee. They have dodged the question as to who is going to get the relief. They have not made any reference whatever to the evidence produced by the hon. Member for Dundee and read to this Committee with regard to the ownership of royalties in Scotland. As to those who are to receive relief in Scotland when the existing leases have become non-existent, the whole issue resolves itself, so far as this particular Section and the Amendment are concerned, into who is the owner of the mineral royalties of Scotland, and, therefore, who is the individual or who are the individuals to whom this particular relief is to be granted? The replies of the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Solicitor-General for Scotland do not meet the issue at all. The whole issue has been avoided just as questions which have been asked across the Floor of this House since 1919 by myself and by other Members.

The CHAIRMAN: This does not arise under this Bill. The whole question is the apportionment of the hereditaments and the apportionment of rates and the relief of rates accordingly. The question of the ownership may be settled afterwards by the Courts, but that does not arise on this Amendment.

Mr. MACLEAN: That might be the issue in the Courts, but the issue would be made much simpler for us if we could understand exactly who is going to get the relief. If the relief is going to go back to the Crown, all well and good. If it is going into the pockets, even at the end of the leases that are in existence at the present time, of those who to-day are taking the royalties, then it is a very different matter, and one with regard to which we protest most strongly. We have all along pointed out that the
individuals who to-day are taking the royalties and who will expect this relief when it is granted by the Government are not entitled to them. A point has been raised this afternoon on the old Act of Parliament of 1592, an extract from which was read. The Solicitor-General shakes his head. Why did he not deal with it when he was on his feet if the point was wrong? Why did he not take up that issue?

The CHAIRMAN: I do not see how he could. This is a question of law. Neither the Solicitor-General nor the Secretary of State for Scotland can determine the law, and even Solicitors-General are sometimes wrong.

Mr. L'ESTRANGE MALONE: On a point of Order. May I ask whether you, Mr. Chairman, will accept a Motion for the Closure now in view of the fact that less than 15 minutes remain in which to discuss very important Amendments. The Scottish Members have had adequate consideration, and I submit that the English Members should have the last quarter of an hour to discuss more urgent Amendments on the Paper?

The CHAIRMAN: I fear the Closure and consequent Division would exhaust all the available time. I must ask the hon. Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean) not to deal with this question of law, but to deal with the effect of the wording of the Bill.

Mr. MACLEAN: We have been trying to get a reply from the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite on the points put to him by the Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston), but we have not received an adequate reply yet. I object to this relief being granted to the royalty takers in Scotland. We have been told that the mining industry is in a terrible state. The miners themselves are being compelled by law to work one hour extra per day, in order, as we were told, to save the mining industry from ruin. The Secretary of State for Scotland now brings forward an Amendment proposing to give relief to the royalty takers of that industry. He says that the relief is going to be given direct, while the present leases are in existence, to those who are working the coal—the colliery companies. He also says that at the end
of that period—in some cases it may be next year, and in other cases it may be two years hence—a new bargain will have to be struck. Knowing the Government as we know this Government, I hope that they will not be in office—and this sentiment finds an echo in every part of the country—when a new bargain is struck, but that there will be in power some other Government who will consider the fact that the miner, who is being compelled to work longer hours, is the individual who should be relieved, and not the royalty taker. When relief is granted, it should go directly back to the producers in the industry and not to parasites in the industry as are the royalty takers. The proposal before the Committee is only another instance of this Government's love for their own friends. It is another instance of how they are going to treat the property owners—the profit takers—as compared with their treatment of those who are doing the really useful and productive work of the country.
The Secretary of State and the Solicitor-General for Scotland are proving themselves worthy abetters of the Government in seeing to it that those who have plenty in the country are going to have more, and that those who have very little in the country are going to get less. As far as the Amendment of the Secretary of State for Scotland is concerned, it will result in more being given to the royalty takers. It will not relieve the mining industry and more than putting an additional hour on the miners' working day has relieved the industry, or made it more possible for the industry to survive the collapse brought about through the legislation of the present Government. The methods which the Government are adopting in this Bill will not save the mining industry. Talk about this relief being handed back by the royalty takers to the mine-owners! Can you imagine anything being handed back by the royalty takers once they have laid their hands upon it? We have had no proof given to us that this can be accomplished. The Secretary of State for Scotland says that in some future Bill some points will be inserted to ensure that these reliefs are given back to the industry. The Solicitor-General for Scotland put forward the same idea.
One would have imagined that in having this particular rating proposal brought before the House, the succeeding scheme, namely, the distribution of the sums that are going to be collected and dispersed in relief, would already have been thought out and arranged by the Government. The Bill which has been hinted at as following the present Bill ought already to have been framed, yet when questions have been put to hon. and right hon. Gentlemen on the Government side we have not been, given any information of a definite and specific character. As far as I am concerned, and I think I can say that as far as a large number of other Members are concerned, this Amendment will be pressed to a Division. Why cannot the Solicitor

General for Scotland give us the definite proposal which the Government intend to incorporate in the succeeding Bill? Why cannot he come forward with a definite and specific proposal? It must have been thought out by this time. Neither he nor the Secretary of State for Scotland has given any indication as to how far it is proposed to go, and, therefore, I hope my hon. Friend will press this matter to a Division, and not withdraw his Amendment as did the satellite of the Government the last Amendment.

Question put, "That the word 'not' be there inserted in the proposed Amendment."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 122; Noes, 271.

Division No. 260.]
AYES.
[7.27 p.m.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Runciman, Hilda (Cornwall, St. Ives)


Ammon, Charles George
Hardie, George D.
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter


Attlee, Clement Richard
Harris, Percy A.
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hayes, John Henry
Scrymgeour, E.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Scurr, John


Barnes, A.
Hirst, G. H.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Barr, J.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Broad, F. A.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Shinwell, E.


Bromfield, William
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Bromley, J.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sinclair, Major sir A. (Caithness)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sitch, Charles H.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Rennle (Penistone)


Charleton, H. C.
Kennedy, T.
Snell, Harry


Compton, Joseph
Lansbury, George
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Connolly, M.
Lawrence, Susan
Stephen, Campbell


Cove, W. G.
Lawson, John James
Strauss, E. A.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lee, F.
Sutton, J. E.


Dalton, Hugh
Livingstone, A. M.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lowth, T.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Dennison, R.
Lunn, William
Thorns, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Duncan, C.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Thurtle, Ernest


Edge, Sir William
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Tinker, John Joseph


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Mackinder, W.
Tomlinson, R. P.


Fenby, T. D.
MacLaren, Andrew
Townend, A. E.


Forrest, W.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Gardner, J. P.
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Viant, S. P.


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Gibbins, Joseph
March, S.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gillett, George M
Morris. R. H.
Wellock, Wilfred


Gosling, Harry
Naylor, T. E.
Westwood, J.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenall, T.
Owen, Major G.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Palin, John Henry
Windsor, Walter


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Paling, W.
Wright, W.


Griffith, F. Kingsley
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Ponsonby, Arthur



Groves, T.
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Grundy, T. W.
Purcell, A. A.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Whiteley.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Ritson, J.



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Atkinson, C.
Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Bennett, A. J.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Bainiel, Lord
Berry, Sir George


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Banks, Sir Reginald Mitchell
Bethel, A.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Betterton, Henry B.


Ashley, Lt-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Birchall, Major J. Dearman


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hamilton, Sir George
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Hammersley, S. S.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Brass, Captain W.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Pennefather, Sir John


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hartington, Marquess of
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Briggs, J. Harold
Harvey, G. (Lambeth. Kennington)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Briscoe, Richard George
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Haslam, Henry C.
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian
Pownall, Sir Assheton


Buckingham, Sir H.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Preston, William


Bullock, Captain M.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Price, Major C. W. M.


Burman, J. B.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Radford, E. A


Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Raine, Sir Walter


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hohier, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Ramsden, E.


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Holt, Captain H. P.
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Campbell. E. T.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Reid, D. D. (County Down)


Carver, Major W. H.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Remer, J. R.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Rentoul, G. S.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Rhys, Hon C. A. U.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N).
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Ropner, Major L.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hume, Sir G. H.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Hurd, Percy A.
Rye, F. G.


Clarry, Reginald George
Hurst, Gerald B.
Salmon, Major I.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hutchison, Sir G. A. Clark
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Cooper, A. Duff
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Cope, Major Sir William
Jephcott, A. R.
Sandon, Lord


Couper, J. B.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew W.)


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Skelton, A. N.


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Knox, Sir Alfred
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Lamb, J. Q.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Smithers, Waldron


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Long, Major Eric
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Looker, Herbert William
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Stanley. Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Dawson, Sir Philip
Luce. Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Dixey, A. C.
Lumley, L. R.
Storry-Deans. R.


Drewe, C.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Edmondson. Major A. J.
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Elliot, Major Walter E.
MacIntyre, Ian
Tasker, R. Inigo.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)
McLean, Major A.
Templeton, W. P.


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Macquisten, F. A.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Fermoy, Lord
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel
Waddington, R.


Fielden, E. B.
Malone, Major P. B.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Ford, Sir P. J.
Margesson, Captain D.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Foster, Sir Harry S.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Fraser, Captain Ian
Meller, R. J.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Frece, Sir Walter de
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Wells, S. R.


Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple


Ganzoni, Sir John
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Gates, Percy
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford. Lichfield)


Goff, Sir Park
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Gower, Sir Robert
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Grace, John
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Withers, John James


Grant, Sir J. A.
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Womersley, W. J.


Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Wood, Sir S. Hill-(High Peak)


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Waiter E.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrst'ld.)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Hacking, Douglas H.
Nuttall, Ellis



Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Oakley, T.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Penny and Captain Wallace.

It being after Half-past Seven of the Clock the Chairman proceeded, pursuant to the Order of the House of 28th June, to put forthwith the Question on the Amendment already proposed from the Chair.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 273; Noes, 124.

Division No. 261.]
AYES.
[7.35 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
King, Commodore Henry Douglas


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Dixey, A. C.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Alexander. Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Drewe, C.
Lamb, J. Q.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Eden, Captain Anthony
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey


Atkinson, C.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Locker- Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Long, Major Eric


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Looker, Herbert William


Bainiel, Lord
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Banks, Sir Reginald Mitchell
Fermoy, Lord
Luce, Major-Gen, Sir Richard Hannan


Barclay-Harvey. C. M.
Fielden, E. S.
Lumley, L. R.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Ford, Sir P. J.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Fraser, Captain Ian
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Frece, Sir Walter de
MacIntyre, Ian


Bennett, A. J.
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
McLean, Major A.


Berry, Sir George
Ganzoni, Sir John
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcoin


Bethel, A.
Gates, Percy
Macquisten, F. A.


Betterton, Henry B.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Mac Robert, Alexander M.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Goff, sir Park
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Gower, Sir Robert
Malone, Major P. B.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Grace, John
Margesson, Captain D.


Brass, Captain W.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Marriott. Sir J. A. R.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Meller, R. J.


Briggs, J. Harold
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd


Briscoe, Richard George
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. J.
Meyer, Sir Frank


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexhuam)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. Berks, Newb'y
Hacking, Douglas H.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Bullock, Captain M.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Burman, J. B.
Hamilton, Sir George
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.
Hammersley, S. S.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Hartington, Marquess of
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Nelson, Sir Frank


Campbell, E. T.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Neville, Sir Reginald J.


Carver, Major w. H.
Haslam, Henry C.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. H. (Prtsmth, S.)
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hon. W. G. (Ptrsl'ld.)


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Nuttall, Ellis


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Hennessy. Major Sir G. R. J.
Oakley, T.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hohier, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Holt, Captain H. P.
Pennefather, Sir John


Christie. J. A.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Perkins. Colonel E. K.


Clarry, Reginald George
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Peto, G, (Somerset, Frome)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster. Mossley)
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert
Pownall, Sir Assheton


Cooper, A. Duff
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Preston, William


Cope, Major Sir William
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney. N.)
Price, Major C. W. M.


Couper. J. B.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Radford, E. A.


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hume, Sir G. H.
Raine, Sir Walter


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Ramsden, E.


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hurd, Percy A.
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hurst, Gerald B.
Held, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hutchison, Sir G. A. Clark
Reid, D. D. (County Down)


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Remer, J. R.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Rentoul, G. S.


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Jephcott, A. R
Rice, Sir Frederick


Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston).
Ropner, Major L.


Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H
Wayland, Sir William A.


Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Wells, S. R.


Rye, F. G.
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
White, Lieut.-Col Sir G. Dairymple


Salmon, Major I.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Sandeman, N. Stewart
Storry-Deans, R.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Sanderson, Sir Frank
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Sandon, Lord
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Withers, John James


Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Tasker, R. Inigo.
Womersley, W. J.


Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Templeton, W. P.
Wood, E. (Cheet't, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell
Wood, Sir S. Hon. (High Peak)


Skelton, A. N.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Waddington, R.
Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)


Smithers, Waldron
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)



Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Warrender, Sir Victor
Mr. Penny and Captain Wallace.


NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Runciman, Hilda (Cornwall, St. Ives)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter


Ammon, Charles George
Hardie, George D.
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Attlee, Clement Richard
Harris, Percy A.
Scrymgeour, E.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hayes, John Henry
Scurr, John


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Barnes, A.
Hirst, G. H
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Barr, J.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Batey, Joseph
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Shinwell, E.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda. West)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Bromfield, William
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sitch, Charles H.


Bromley, J.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. N. E.
Kennedy, T.
Snell, Harry


Charleton, H. C.
Lansbury, George
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Compton, Joseph
Lawrence, Susan
Stephen, Campbell


Connolly, M.
Lawson, John James
Strauss, E. A.


Cove, W. G.
Lee. F.
Sutton, J. E.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Livingstone, A. M.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Dalton, Hugh
Lowth, T.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lunn, William
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Dennison, R.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Thurtle, Ernest


Duncan. C.
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Tinker, John Joseph


Edge, Sir William
Mackinder, W.
Tomlinson, R. P.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
MacLaren, Andrew
Townend, A. E.


Fenby, T. D.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Forrest, W.
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Viant, S. P.


Gardner, J. P.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
March, S.
Watts-Morgan. Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gibbins, Joseph
Morris, R. H.
Wellock, Wilfred


Gillett, George M.
Naylor, T. E.
Westwood, J.


Gosling, Harry
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Owen, Major G.
Wilson. R. J. (Jarrow)


Greenall, T.
Palin, John Henry
Windsor, Waiter


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
Wright, W.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Griffith, F. Kingsley
Ponsonby, Arthur



Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Groves, T.
Purcell, A. A.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Whiteley.


Grundy, T. W.
Ritson, J.



Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)

The Chairman then proceeded successively to put forthwith the Questions tions on any Amendments moved by the Government of which notice had been given, and the Questions necessary to bring the Committee stage to a conclusion.

Amendment proposed: In page 11, line 18, at the end, to add the words:

(12) The assessor shall be entitled at any reasonable time of day, on giving not lees than twenty-four hours previous notice in
writing to the occupier, to enter, survey, and value for the purposes of the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act, 1854, and the Acts amending that Act, including this Act, any lands and heritages within the county or burgh or district for which he acts as assessor, and if any person refuses to admit the assessor to enter any lands and heritages or obstructs him in making his survey or valuation he shall be liable on conviction by a court of summary jurisdiction to a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds:

(13) As respects the valuation of lands and heritages for the year beginning on
the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and twenty-nine, the following provisions shall have effect:—

(a) Any officer or person employed by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue and authorised by them for the purpose shall for the purpose of carrying out his powers and duties under this Act have the like rights as the assessor to enter, survey, and value any lands and heritages to which he has reason to believe the provision of this Act may apply, and any person refusing to admit such officer or person or obstructing him in making his survey or valuation shall be liable on conviction by a court of summary jurisdiction to a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds;
(b) The Secretary of State may make Regulations requiring the assessor to consult with any such officer or person employed as aforesaid as regards any particulars required by this Section to be shown in the valuation roll, and generally

for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of this Act, and such Regulations may modify and adapt the provisions of the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act, 1854, and the Acts amending that Act. The Regulations shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after they are made:

Provided that if an address is presented to His Majesty by either House within the next subsequent twenty-one days on which that House has sat after the Regulations are laid before it, praying that the Regulations may be annulled, the Regulations shall thenceforth be void, without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done thereunder.—[Major Elliot.]

Question put, "That the Amendment be made."

The Committee divided: Ayes. 269; Noes, 122.

Division No. 262.]
AYES.
[7.45 p.m.


Acland Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Agg-Gardner. Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hartington, Marquess of


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Cooper, A. Duff
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Cope, Major Sir William
Haslam, Henry C.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Couper, J. B.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian


Atkinson, C.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Henn, Sir Sydney H


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hennessy, Major Sir G, R. J.


Bainiel, Lord
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Banks, Sir Reginald Mitchell
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hohier, Sir Gerald Fitzroy


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Holt, Capt. H. P.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Hopkins. J. W. W.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)


Bennett, A. J.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Berry, Sir George
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.


Bethel, A.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.


Betterton, Henry B.
Dixey, A. C.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Drewe, C.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hume, Sir G. H.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis


Brass, Captain W.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hurd, Percy A.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hurst, Gerald B.


Briggs, J. Harold
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.


Briscoe, Richard George
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Fermoy, Lord
Jephcott, A. R.


Brown, Brig. Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Fielden, E. B.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Ford, Sir P. J.
Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William


Bullock, Captain M.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Burman, J. B.
Fraser, Captain Ian
King, Commodore Henry Douglas


Burney, Lieut.-Com Charles D.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Knox, Sir Alfred


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Ganzoni, Sir John
Lamb, J. Q.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edwerd
Gates, Percy
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Campbell, E. T.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Carver, Major W. H.
Goff, sir Park
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Gower, Sir Robert
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Grace, John
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'tn)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Grant, Sir J. A.
Long, Major Eric


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Looker, Herbert William


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E.)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Lumley, L. R.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D, (I. of W.)


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Hacking, Douglas H.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Christie. J. A.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
MacIntyre, Ian


Clarry, Reginald George
Hamilton, Sir George
McLean, Major A.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hammersley, S. S.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Macquisten, F. A.
Preston, William
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Price, Major C. W. M.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel
Radford, E. A.
Storry-Deans, R.


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Raine, Sir Walter
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Malone, Major P. B.
Ramsden, E.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Margesson, Captain D.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Tasker, R. Inigo.


Meller, R. J.
Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Templeton, W. P.


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Homer. J. R.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Meyer, Sir Frank
Rentoul, G. S.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell


Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Rice, Sir Frederick
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Waddington, R.


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Ropner, Major L.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Morden, Colonel Walter Grant
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Rye, F. G.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Salmon, Major I.
Wells, S. R.


Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Nelson, Sir Frank
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Newton. Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Sandon, Lord
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Nicholson. Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Winterton Rt. Hon. Ear


Nuttall, Ellis
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Withers, John James


Oakley, T.
Shaw, Lt.-Cot. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)
Womersley, W. J.


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Skelton, A. N.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine. C.)
Wood, Sir S. Hill. (High Peak)


Pennefather, Sir John
Smithers, Waldron
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.



Pliditch, Sir Philip
Sprot, Sir Alexander
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Power, Sir John Cecil
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Captain Bowyer and Mr. Penny.


Pownall, Sir Assheton
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)



NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hall. G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Ammon, Charles George
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Scrymgeour, E.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hardie, George D.
Scurr, John


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Harris, Percy A.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hayes, John Henry
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Barr, J.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Batey, Joseph
Hirst, G. H.
Shinwell, E.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Short, Alfred (Wednesday)


Broad, F. A
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Bromfield, William
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Sitch, Charles H.


Bromley, J.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Snell, Harry


Charleton, H. C.
Kelly, W. T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Compton, Joseph
Kennedy, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Connolly, M.
Lansbury, George
Strauss, E. A.


Cove, W. G.
Lawrence, Susan
Sutton, J. E.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lawson, John James
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Dalton, Hugh
Lee, F.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Livingstone, A. M.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Dennison, R.
Lowth, T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Duncan, C.
Lunn, William
Tinker, John Joseph


Edge, Sir William
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Tomlinson, R. P.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth. Bedwellty)
Mackinder, W.
Townend, A. E.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
MacLaren, Andrew
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Fenby, T. D.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Viant, S. P.


Forrest, W.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Gardner, J. P.
March, S.
Watts-Morgan. Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Morris, R. H.
Wellock, Wilfred


Gibbins, Joseph
Naylor, T, E.
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
Oliver, George Harold
Whiteley, W.


Gosling, Harry
Owen, Major G.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Palin, John Henry
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Greenall, T.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Windsor, Walter


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Wright, W.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Griffith, F. Kingsley
Purcell, A. A.



Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Ritson, J.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Groves, T.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Paling.


Grundy, T. W.
Runciman, Hilda (Cornwall, St. Ives)

Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 279; Noes, 99.

Division No. 263.]
AYES.
[7.54 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Hannan


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Fade, Sir Bertram G.
Lumley, L. R.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Fenby, T. D.
MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Fermoy, Lord
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Fielden, E. B.
Macintyre, Ian


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Ford, Sir P. J.
McLean, Major A.


Atkinson, C.
Forrest, W.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Macquisten, F. A.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Fraser, Captain Ian
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Bainiel, Lord
Frece, Sir Walter de
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel


Banks, Sir Reginald Mitchell
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Malone, Major P. B.


Beamish, Rear Admiral T. P. H.
Gates, Percy
Margesson, Captain D.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Meller, R. J.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Goff, Sir Park
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd


Bennett, A. J.
Gower, Sir Robert
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-


Berry, Sir George
Grace, John
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Bethel, A.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Betterton, Henry B.
Grattan-Doyle. Sir N.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'tn's'w. E)
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Griffith, F. Kingsley
Morden, Col. W. Grant


Brass, Captain W.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Morris, R. H.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Briggs, J. Harold
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Briscoe, Richard George
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Nelson, Sir Frank


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hamilton, Sir George
Neville, Sir Reginald J.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hammersley, S. S.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Harris, Percy A.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptsf'ld.)


Bullock, Captain M.
Hartington, Marquess of
Nuttall, Ellis


Burman, J. B.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Oakley, T.


Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Haslam, Henry C.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Ormsby, Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Campbell, E. T.
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian
Owen, Major G.


Carver, Major W. H.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Pennefather, Sir John


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Pliditch, Sir Philip


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Hohier, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Power, sir John Cecil


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hotbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Pownall, Sir Assheton


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Lady wood)
Holt, Captain H. P.
Preston, William


Charteris, Brigadier-General).
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Price, Major C. W. M.


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Radford, E. A.


Christie, J. A.
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng, Universities)
Raine, Sir Walter


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Ramsden, E.


Clarry, Reginald George
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Held, D. P. (County Down)


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Remer, J. R.


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hume, Sir G. H.
Rentoul, G. S.


Cooper, A. Duff
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Cope, Major Sir William
Hurd, Percy A.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Couper, J. B.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Roberts. E. H. G. (Flint)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Rodd, Rt. Hon. sir James Rennell


Cowan. Sir Wm. Henry (Islington. N.)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Ropner, Major L.


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter


Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Jephcott, A. R.
Rye, F. G.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Salmon, Major I.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Kinloch-Cooke. Sir Clement
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Knox, Sir Alfred
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Lamb, J. O.
Sandon, Lord


Dawson, Sir Philip
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Sassoon. Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Dixey, A. C.
Livingstone, A. M.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)


Drewe, C.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Locker, Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Edge, Sir William
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Long, Major Eric
Skelton, A. N.


Elliott, Major Walter E.
Looker, Herbert William
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Klnc'dine, C.)


Smithers, Waldron
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Thorne, G, R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Tomlinson, R. P.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Sprot, Sir Alexander
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Withers, John James


Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Womersley, W. J.


Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Waddington, R.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Wallace, Captain D. E.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Storry-Deans, R.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Strauss, E. A.
Warrender, Sir Victor
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Wayland, Sir William A.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Wells, S. R.



Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Tasker, R. Inigo.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Captain Bowyer and Mr. Penny.


Templeton, W. P.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)



NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, F. (York, W. R. Normanton)
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Ammon, Charles George
Hardie, George D.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hayes, John Henry
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Baker, J. (Wolverhamton, Bilston)
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Shinwell, E.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hirst, G. H.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Barr, J.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Sitch, Charles H.


Batey, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Broad, F. A.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bromfield, William
Kelly, W. T.
Snell, Harry


Bromley, J.
Kennedy, T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Lansbury, George
Stephen, Campbell


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Lawrence, Susan
Sutton, J. E.


Charleton, H. C.
Lawson, John James
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Compton, Joseph
Lee, F.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Connolly, M.
Lowth, t.
Thurtle, Ernest


Cove, W. G.
Lunn, William
Tinker, John Joseph


Dalton, Hugh
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Townend, A. E.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Mackinder, W.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Dennison, R.
MacLaren, Andrew
Viant, S. P.


Duncan, C.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gardner, J. P.
March, S.
Wellock, Wilfred


Gibbins, Joseph
Naylor, T. E.
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
Oliver, George Harold
Whiteley, W.


Gosling, Harry
Palin, John Henry
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Greenall, T.
Potts, John S.
Windsor, Waiter


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Purcell, A. A.
Wright, W.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Ritson, J.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)



Groves, T.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Grundy, T. W.
Scrymgeour, E.
Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Paling.


Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

CLAUSE 10.—(Short title construction and extent.)

FIRST SCHEDULE.—(Provisions for bringing into conformity with this Act Valuation Lists which will be in force on the 1st day of October, 1929.)

Amendments made: In page 12, line 13, leave out the words "an agricultural hereditament."

Leave out from the word "hereditaments," in line 24, to the word "the" in line 27, and insert instead thereof the words:
which they provisionally conclude to be agricultural hereditaments and all hereditaments with respect to which claims have been received together with the net annual
value thereof, and the gross value thereof (if any), and there shall be entered in relation to each hereditament in respect of which a claim has been made.

In line 29, leave out the words "an agricultural hereditament."

In line 32, leave out from the beginning to the word "whether" in line 33.

In page 13, line 10, at the end, insert the words:
and in the case of agricultural hereditaments any returns made under the principal Act in relation thereto.

In line 18, after the word "value" insert the words "or gross value."

In line 24, after the word "value" insert the words "or gross value."

In page 15, line 9, at the end, insert the words:
(d) An owner of a hereditament shall be entitled to object to the particulars entered in a draft special list with respect to the hereditament, or to the omission of the hereditament therefrom, and to appeal against the decision on such objection notwithstanding that the omission was due to the failure on the part of the occupier of the hereditament to make a claim under this schedule.

In line 42, leave out the words "newer altered."

In page 16, line 16, at the end, add the words:
and the expression 'occupier,' in relation to a hereditament the owner of which is liable to pay or does pay the rates, includes the owner."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

Question put, "That the Schedule, as amended, be the First Schedule to the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 250; Noes, 120.

Division No. 264.]
AYES.
[8.8 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Drewe, C.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Eden, Captain Anthony
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Long, Major Eric


Astor, Ma). Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Looker, Herbert William


Atkinson, C.
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Fermoy, Lord
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Fielden, E. B.
Lumley, L. R.


Bainiel, Lord
Ford, Sir P. J.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Banks, Sir Reginald Mitchell
Forrest, W.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Fraser, Captain Ian
MacIntyre, Ian


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Frece, Sir Walter de
McLean, Major A.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Ganzoni, Sir John
Macquisten, F. A.


Bennett, A. J.
Gates, Percy
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Berry, Sir George
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Bethel, A.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Malone, Major P. B.


Betterton, Henry B.
Goff, Sir Park
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Gower, Sir Robert
Meller, R. J.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Grace, John
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Brass, Captain W.
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w. E.)
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Briggs, J. Harold
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Briscoe, Richard George
Hail, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Morden, Colonel Walter Grant


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Hamilton, Sir George
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hammersley, S. S.
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Bullock, Captain M.
Hannon. Patrick Joseph Henry
Nelson, Sir Frank


Burman, J. B.
Hartington, Marquess of
Neville, Sir Reginald J.


Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Newman, Sir R. K. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Haslam, Henry C.
Nicholson, O, (Westminster)


Campbell, E. T.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptraf'ld.)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian
Nuttall, Ellis


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Oakley, T.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hohier, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Pennefather, Sir John


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Holbrook. Sir Arthur Richard
Penny, Frederick George


Christie. J. A.
Holt, Captain H. P.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Clarry, Reginald George
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Power, Sir John Cecil


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Preston, William


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Price, Major C. W. M.


Cooper, A. Duff
Hume, Sir G. H.
Radford, E. A.


Cope, Major Sir William
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Raine, Sir Walter


Couper, J. B.
Hurd, Percy A.
Ramsden, E.


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester. Crewe)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Held, D. D. (County Down)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Renter, J. R.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Rentoul, G. S.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Jephcott, A. R.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yervil)
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Davies, Dr. Vernon
King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Ropner, Major L.


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Kinloch-Cooke. Sir Clement
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Dawson, Sir Philip
Knox, Sir Alfred
Rye. F. G.


Dixey, A. C.
Lamb, J. Q.
Salmon, Major I.


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Sandeman, N. Stewart
Storry-Deans, R.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Sanderson, Sir Frank
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Sandon, Lord
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Tasker, R. Inigo.
Withers, John James


Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Templeton, W. P.
Womersley, W. J.


Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Skelton, A. N.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kine'dine, C.)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Smithers, Waldron
Waddington, R.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Wallace, Captain D. E.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)



Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Sprot, Sir Alexander
Wayland, Sir William A.
Captain Margesson and Sir Victor Warrender.


Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Wells, S. R.



Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple



NOES.


Adamson. W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Grundy, T. W.
Runciman, Hilda (Cornwall, St. Ives).


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter


Ammon, Charles George
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Scrymgeour, E.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hardie, George D.
Scurr, John


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Harris, Percy A.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Barnet, A.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Barr, J.
Hirst, G. H.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Batey, Joseph
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Shinwell, E.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Broad, F. A.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Bromfield, William
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Sitch, Charles H.


Bromley, J.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Snell, Harry


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kelly, W. T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Charleton, H. C.
Kennedy, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Compton, Joseph
Lansbury, George
Strauss, E. A


Connolly, M.
Lawrence, Susan
Sutton, J. E.


Cove, W. G.
Lawson, John James
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lee, F.
Thorne. G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Dalton, Hugh
Livingstone, A. M.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lowth, T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Dennison, R.
Lunn, William
Tinker, John Joseph


Duncan, C.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Tomlinson, R. P.


Edge, Sir William
Mackinder, W.
Townend, A. E.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
MacLaren, Andrew
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Viant, S. P.


Fenny, T. D.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Gardner, J. P.
March, S.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Morris, R. H.
Wellock, Wilfred


Gibbins, Joseph
Naylor, T. E.
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M
Oliver, George Harold
Whiteley, W.


Gosling, Harry
Owen, Major G.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Palin, John Henry
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Greenall, T.
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Parkinson. John Allen (Wigan)
Wright, W.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Griffith, F. Kingsley
Purcell, A. A.



Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Ritson, J.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Groves, T.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Mr. Hayes and Mr. B. Smith.

SECOND SCHEDULE.—(Provisions of the Rating and Valuation Act, 1925, applied to London.)

Question put, "That this be the Second Schedule to the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 255; Noes, 100.

Division No. 265.]
AYES.
[8.16 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bainiel, Lord
Betterton, Henry B.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Banks, Sir Reginald Mitchell
Birchall, Major J. Dearman


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S.
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Brass, Captain W.


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Brassey, Sir Leonard


Atkinson, C.
Bennett, A. J.
Briggs, J. Harold


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Berry, Sir George
Briscoe, Richard George


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Bethel, A.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Brown, Brig., Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Pliditch, Sir Philip


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Bullock, Captain M.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Preston, William


Burman, J. B.
Hohelr, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Price, Major C. W. M.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Radford, E. A.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Holt, Captain H. P.
Raine, Sir Walter


Campbell, E. T.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Ramsden, E.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Reid, D. D. (County Down)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Remer, J. R.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Rentoul, G. S.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Hume, Sir G. H.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Christie, J. A.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Clarry, Reginald George
Hurd, Percy A.
Ropner, Major L.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hurst, Gerald B.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cochrane, Commander Hon A. D.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Rye, F. G.


Colfox, Major Wm Phillips
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Salmon, Major I.


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Cooper, A. Duff
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Cope, Major Sir William
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Couper, J. B.
Jephcott, A. R.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sandon, Lord


Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks. W. R., Sowerby)


Crooks, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Knox, Sir Alfred
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Lamb, J. Q.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Skelton, A. N.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Dawson, Sir Philip
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Smithers, Waldron


Dixey, A. C.
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Long, Major Eric
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Drewe, C.
Looker, Herbert William
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Edge, Sir William
Luce, Maj.-Gen. sir Richard Harman
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lumley, L. R.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Macdonald, R- (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Storry-Deans, R.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
MacIntyre, Ian
Strauss, E. A.


Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
McLean, Major A.
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Fenby, T. D.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Fielden, E. B.
Macquisten, F. A.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Ford, Sir P. J.
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Tasker, R. Inigo.


Forrest, W.
Making, Brigadler-General E.
Templeton, W. P.


Foster, Sir Harry S.
Malone, Major P. B.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Eraser, Captain Ian
Meller, R. J.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Frece, Sir Walter de
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Tomlinson, R. P.


Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Ganzoni, Sir John
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Waddington, R.


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Goff, Sir Park
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Gower, Sir Robert
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Grace, John
Morden, Colonel Walter Grant
Wayland, Sir William A.


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Morris, R. H.
Wells, S. R.


Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Greenwood. Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Windsor-Clive. Lieut.-Colonel George


Hamilton, Sir George
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Womersley, W. J.


Hammersley, S. S.
Nicholson, col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsl'ld.)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Nuttall, Ellis
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Harris, Percy A.
Oakley, T.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Hartington, Marquess of
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Owen, Major G.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Pennefather, Sir John
Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)


Haslam, Henry C.
Penny, Frederick George



Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Captain Margesson and Sir Victor Warrender.


NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff. Cannock)
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Broad, F. A.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Barnes, A.
Bromfield, William


Ammon, Charles George
Barr, J.
Bromley, J.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Batey, Joseph
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel




Charleton, H. C.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Compton, Joseph
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Connolly, M.
Kelly, W. T.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Cove, W. G.
Kennedy, T.
Shinwell, E.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lansbury, George
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Dalton, Hugh
Lawrence, Susan
Sitch, Charles H.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lawson, John James
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Dennison, R.
Lee, F.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Duncan, C.
Livingstone, A. M.
Snell, Harry


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Lowth, T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Gardner, J. P.
Lunn, William
Stephen, Campbell


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Sutton, J. E.


Gibbins, Joseph
Mackinder, W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Gillett, George M.
MacLaren, Andrew
Thurtle, Ernest


Gosling, Harry
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Tinker, John Joseph


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Townend, A. E.


Greenall, T.
March, S.
Viant, S. P.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Naylor, T. E.
Watson, w. M. (Dunfermline)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Oliver, George Harold
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Palin, John Henry
Wellock, Wilfred


Groves, T.
Paling, W.
Westwood, J.


Grundy, T. W.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Whiteley, W.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Potts, John S.
Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Purcell, A. A.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Hardie, George D.
Ritson, J.
Windsor, Walter


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Wright, W.


Hirst, G. H.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Scrymgeour, E.



John, William (Rhondda, West)
Scurr, John
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Hayes and Mr. B. Smith.

Whereupon, THE CHAIRMAN left the Chair to report the Bill, as amended, to the House, pursuant to the Order of the House of 28th June.

Bill reported; as amended to be considered To-morrow, and to be printed. (Bill 170.)

Orders of the Day — REORGANISATION OF OFFICES (SCOTLAND) BILL.

As Amended (in the Standing Committee), considered.

Mr. T. KENNEDY: May I ask how you propose, Mr. Speaker, to deal with the Amendments that appear on the Paper? Do you propose to allow a Debate on each of the Amendments on the Paper, or do you propose to allow a general Debate on them as they affect the various Scottish Departments?

Mr. SPEAKER: I understand that the case for each of these Amendments was separately stated at considerable length in the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills upstairs, and I do not think it would be right for the House to repeat the discussion here. On the other hand, I should be sorry if hon. Members were not allowed to express their opinions shortly upon these various Offices, the extinction of which is proposed. Probably the most convenient course would be to have a general discussion on the policy of the extinction of these Offices on the first of the three Amendments which propose to
leave out the respective Offices, and then, if hon. Members wish to do so, to have a Division on each of the three.

CLAUSE 1.—(Substitution of Departments for Boards of Health and Agriculture and Prison Commissioners for Scotland.)

Mr. HARDIE: I beg to move, in Clause 1, page 1, line G, to leave out the words "the Scottish Board of Health."
It is quite true that the subjects individually have been discussed in Committee to a very great, extent, but I think the importance of the changes to be made justifies the length of the Committee Debates upon them. If it were simply a question of the reorganisation of Offices, there would not have been this long period of discussion in Committee, but there is much more in it than that. The reorganisation of anything means that you still retain the principles, but that you change over in their working out, but the changes now suggested by this Bill are that we extinguish certain Scottish Offices, and in their place there is going to be appointed a special civil servant. It is against this that we have made our biggest fight. If the Secretary of State for Scotland could at any time have brought forward arguments to show that these Departments were inefficient in administration, not only would the time of the Committee have been saved, but we might not have been discussing the matter further to-night. Not a single
instance, however, of the inefficiency of any of these Offices that he seeks to wipe out did the right hon. Gentleman bring forward.
From the Scotsman's point of view, if there is anything in nationalism at all, we very much regret that any Secretary of State for Scotland should, not only in this case, but in the last five years, have taken every opportunity of taking away some of these things that belong to Scotland. We feel that there is something tragic in these national contacts being wiped out. If the right hon. Gentleman had been wanting to persuade the change, if he had come first with a definite statement of the inefficiency of these offices, if he had stated that Scotland could not produce the type of mentality necessary to undertake the responsibility of these offices, we might have had a basis of reality for the discussion, but we have not been provided with a single instance of the kind. All that we are told, in that language that sounds, when it is heard, as if a doomed man had written it, is that certain things will happen "on the appointed day." That brings us back, especially those of us who come from the same land as the Secretary of State for Scotland, to those Sunday mornings in the old Church when we heard words such as these: "On the appointed day." It always seems to me when I hear these words spoken, or see them in print, that there is some sense of doom carried forward with them.
On the appointed day, the Scottish Board of Health, the Board of Agriculture for Scotland, and the Prison Commissioners for Scotland shall cease to exist.
It is almost biblical, and yet it carries with it that sense of doom, even in the last phrase—"shall cease to exist." I cannot understand any man claiming to be a Scotsman who even takes a part in trying to wipe out anything that is national, and what is more native to nationality that a nation's instinctive right to govern, to administer, its own affairs? I can think of nothing more degrading to a nation than to feel that it is being treated as if there was not the mentality in Scotland to carry forward Scotland's work in administration. It does not require the Secretary of State for Scotland or anybody else to tell us the results of the work of these Departments. The work that they have done will always
live as monuments of concentrated effort from a national point of view, because I never forget the difficulties under which these various Departments have had to work. There was always that contact with Whitehall that just prevented the fullest development that one would expect from a Scotsman looking after his own national affairs. In the Committee upstairs, there were Amendments opposing all these deletions, and may I repeat once and for all that there never has been any demand from Scotland for these changes?
If there had been evidence from these various departments of certain inefficiencies, of cases where a department was not working properly, or where there was some slackness about the control of individuals, all tending towards the necessity for a reconstruction or reorganisation, there would have been some ground for the Secretary of State proceeding. But this evidence did not exist, and because a Tory Government were seeking in every way to decentralise all that was left of Scottish administration, they conceived the idea that, in order to rob Scotland of its last offices, they could use the Secretary of State for Scotland in order to put in a political system. It is not to be a question now of whether a man has that intimate knowledge that comes from long training in a department; he has not to have an intimate knowledge of Scotland or Scottish affairs, he is to be a certain class of Civil servant. Of course, Toryism stands for all that is undemocratic, and I can quite see their point of view, that if they get a despot in the shape of a Civil servant, they will be able to do things that will meet with the approval of reaction in Toryism.

Mr. LANSBURY: What is that?

Mr. HARDIE: It cannot be described in the English language. I am now studying another language, which I am told contains words that might equal the sense, or the lack of it, in the Tory party regarding these things.

Mr. WESTWOOD: What language is it—Welsh?

Mr. HARDIE: I am sorry that it is not a language belonging to the British Isles. We have not been able to cultivate a language capable of expressing the depth and degradation of Toryism. There seems to be a concerted and
determined effort to destroy what is left of administration in Scotland. What was contained in the King's Speech shows that the Cabinet have made up their minds that, now they have got a man who will do it, to use every means in their power to do it. We are told that there is no ill-feeling between the three nations that make up Great Britain. I accept that as a phrase, but how can I accept it when this kind of thing is introduced into the King's Speech? The King's Speech is supposed to be an Address from representatives of all parts of the island, and yet we have in it an intimation that one part is to be decapitated, as far as certain offices are concerned. The Secretary of State has implied more than once that the change sought was merely an addition. In Committee on this Bill, the Secretary of State said:
When people talk about bureaucracy, what does it really imply? The responsibility which I have to Parliament is not, in fact, going to be altered in any way by this Measure. All I am asking is for a more efficient machine. Somebody said that access to responsible officials or to expert officials would be denied. That is not the case. These offices will be organised with a responsible head, responsible to the Minister and responsible for the advice which he gives to the Minister. There will be the various Departments in the offices just as there are now dealing with this or that aspect of health or of housing, and the beads of each of these Departments will be drawn from the Civil Service as they are drawn to-day.
When the right hon. Gentleman said that, he did not mean that the Civil servants as they were drawn to-day were the heads of these Departments, and that others were subordinate to them. He went on to say:
They will have access not only to the bead of the Department who advises the Minister, but if there is any difference of opinion or contrary view expressed, they will have access to the Minister himself. In fact, while you abolish the Board system you will retain within the offices as the departmental ordinary procedure just as it takes place in other offices to-day, those consultations between the heads of Departments which are essential."—[OFFICIAL REPORT (Standing Committee on Scottish Bills), 21st March, 1928: col. 10.]
The Secretary of State knows that this is not in keeping with what is taking place. He has had representations in regard not only to the alterations that are to be made by the change, but also
to the change that is to be made in the conditions, and he has probably received a communication from the Institution of Professional Civil Servants. They draw attention to that to which I drew attention in Committee, namely, the subordination which is to take place. Reorganisation, if it meant reorganisation, would not have meant that something new was to come in and to be over the rest, and so bring in this subordination. It would seem by what has taken place and by the right hon. Gentleman's speech that there is some little irregularity, and the evidence of that irregularity is contained in this document, which says:—
This subordination has recently been challenged by the Board of Agriculture for Scotland, but reference to the Lord Advocate's speech on the Second Reading shows that the intention is to apply rigidly the permanent secretary system as it obtains in England, under which the technical experts will be reduced to the position of mere consultants with no executive authority or right of appeal to the Minister where their advice is being over-ruled.
I am not contesting that if the administrative side is to over-ride the technical side, the technical men should have the right to put their case to the Minister direct. Not only on this subject, but on every subject in the House when the question of the technical men has come up, I have fought for this. There is no use in a Government paying large sums to technical men and then keeping them like cows in a shed to milk information from them when required. I object to the continual running between the Front Bench and the Government advisers behind the Speaker's Chair. These men with real knowledge are asked for their opinion by the heads of the Department on the political side, who are supposed to be above them. The man on the Front Bench is supposed to be a man with an unbiased mind—that means an empty mind. This technical man, with full knowledge, is asked to explain something, and he explains it, but they do not understand him, and so they turn him down. That is what happens 99 times out of 100 in Government affairs. I know it because I have tested it out in this House. Surely the Secretary of State will have something to say on that point, because if the technical adviser is going to be crushed and kept down, and never to get to the head of a Department, it will mean that we shall never get the harmony which is
absolutely necessary in a Department before good work can be done. Why should we lay down conditions which treat the officials of a Department as though they were a row of doors—No. 1 is the boss, and No. 2 is the fellow next to him. I know from experience of public work that whenever you try to follow on those lines you get friction; the machine will not work smoothly, and that must produce bad results. All this is to take place "on the appointed day."
During the Committee proceedings there was some contention in regard to this question of subordination. At first the Secretary of State was not quite clear on the matter. He did not think he was going to have any defence such as I am describing, but either he or the Lord Advocate is wrong, and I will leave them to fight it out. During the Second Reading Debate the Lord Advocate said:
the existing members of the various Boards are retained in the Departments and will find their place under the changed form of administration. They will not have the same responsibility which they had, along with the Chairman, as members of the Board; they will be subordinate to the permanent head of the Department, but they will be there.…These experts will still be retained in the Department, but they will only be acting in a subordinate or advisory position."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 5th March, 1928; col. 917, Vol. 214.]
All that has been said at public meetings outside about not taking away this or that is not supported by the facts which are to be found in reports of the proceedings in this House. I know there are many other hon. Members who will be taking part in the discussion to-night——

Mr. LANSBURY: Not from the other side.

Mr. HARDIE: I am not responsible for the other side. [Interruption]. Perhaps it is out of order for the Liberal party to be present. On this question of the technical man, I say I would rather see the technical man sitting there by right, the right of his knowledge. What an insult it must be to a man with technical knowledge when some man says to him, "I will condescend to discuss something that you know and that I do not know." That is too often the position, and not alone in Boards like the Board of Health and the Board of Agriculture. I know a farmer who is one of the biggest experts in his own line. Just imagine this big, fine fellow, with fine red beard, and hair
the colour of that of the Secretary of State, coming into an office with all the breezes of the countryside about him—called into consultation with some thing who has never seen more than the inside of a college, who is called an expert civil servant. This man begins to ask the man who knows some questions. I can just imagine what that friend of mine would say. [Interruption]. I will not say it here, but, put in Sunday language, he would say, "My lad, I never discuss what I know with those who do not know, unless as a master to a pupil." And that would be the finish.
We cannot be too careful about the proposals in this Bill, because once we let this Measure go we have lost our grip on the situation. In the hall outside this Chamber there is a large picture dealing with an historical incident when certain Scotsmen sold the Scottish people for a mess of pottage. As I have told the Secretary of State, if he does not alter—and while there is life there is hope—the only thing left will be to complete that picture downstairs by painting him in at the back. I would like to have the job of painting him in the picture. Having regard to this Bill and all that it contains, I should see him, when I was completing that picture, not as Sir John Gilmour, Secretary of State for Scotland, but I should see him as a tool of the Tory party with horns and cloven feet—as Auld Nickie, which means his Satanic Majesty. If the administrative official is to override the technical adviser, in all fairness the latter ought to have the right of going direct to the Minister. That is the practice which exists in the Ministry of Health in England. Sir George Newman and the other medical experts would not consent to be subjected as these experts of the Scottish Department are to be. They always have direct access to the Minister of Health, not only to be heard, but to decide. They decide medically, and the other fellow, who does not understand the medical side, decides politically. That is the position.
I want to point out to the Secretary of State for Scotland that in my view if a thing is good enough for England it should be good enough for Scotland. Has the right hon. Gentleman lost all interest in Scottish affairs and all respect for the Scottish people, because he is now
putting Scotland on a lower rung of the ladder in organisation than the Ministry of Health in England? Many comments have been made about the administration of the offices which are dealt with in this Measure, and I should like the Secretary of State for Scotland, in his reply, to say definitely whether there have been complaints about the Scottish Board of Health, because this is a point upon which the public ought to be informed. If the right hon. Gentleman would answer this question it might take away our opposition.
Those who are putting these proposals forward know that we know that they cannot put up such a defence. Considering the conditions which obtain in Scotland no one can deny that the Scottish Board of Health have done wonders, and in sanitation they have shown the way to other countries. What is going to happen under the reconstructed Board of Health as regards the work which is now being carried on by that organisation? This is a much bigger question than it appears on paper. Those of us who do a little travelling in the remote parts of Scotland know what is meant by a definite knowledge not only of the medical side of these questions but of the existing conditions, and we know that the success of the administration will not be ensured by appointing a civil servant without the necessary contact with these things.
It is the duty of the Secretary of State for Scotland to show us where the inefficiency exists which has caused him to make proposals for the reconstruction of the Board of Agriculture in Scotland. That Board has fought against many difficulties in regard to the land system and other questions. An Agricultural Board working freely in Scotland can give good results, but under the system proposed, where are you going to get any information which will be worth having? You will not get such information from the men who have only seen the inside of a University. You can only get the information you require from the men who know, and those who know are the men who have been engaged in the work for a long time. If we had a Board free from dictation by political heads I am sure Scotland would take its place with any other country in the world. It is no
use having a very highly-skilled college-bred man with a certificate showing so many years' attendance at a college unless that man can bring with him agricultural common-sense, and that cannot be got at the University. Mr. Speir is a Scotsman who would be the measure that I should use in measuring out what I believe is necessary in the case of agricultural knowledge. You should have a free board of skilled men and allow the contact between these men and the Government to be a type of machinery that would control expenditure and that which it would obviously be wrong to do. Let the skilled men be free and then you will get the full advantage of their skill. Who can say that the appointment of a new head to deal with the prisons of Scotland is going to be an improvement? In this House not many weeks ago an English Member complimented the Scottish Prison Commissioners on their Report, and he said that Report was not only much larger but superior to the English Report.
9.0 p.m.
Notwithstanding this evidence, the Secretary of State for Scotland is going to destroy the Scottish Prison Commissioners, although in the past they have been the envy of other countries. How can a civil servant deal effectively with the difficulties that arise in connection with crime and criminals? The Commissioners have had close contact with these things, and they have been associated with the movement which has aimed at doing something for the criminal class. They have tried, and they have done their best to find work which is most suitable for the class of people in our prisons. How much of that spirit would you get from a man who is attracted to the position merely on account of the high salary, but who possesses no real capacity for the work? When I want any information about prisons I communicate directly with the prison authorities. I think England has a great deal to learn on this matter from the Scottish Prison Commissioners, and I am surprised at the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Cabinet putting forward these proposals. Instead of adopting this policy, the right hon. Gentleman ought to have said to the Cabinet: "Let us keep the organisation we have, and then we will show you what the human touch can do." Instead of doing that, the Secretary of State for
Scotland seems to have slunk into the corner at the bidding of the Prime Minister. I only wish we had a Scottish Secretary of State who would fight the Cabinet on behalf of his own country and its institutions, but we have got such a Scottish Secretary. All this has been used as another step in the progress that I was pointing out—the progress during the last five years in doing everything to take from Scotland its real contact with government. I am not allowed to use the language that I would like to use in trying to describe how I feel. There is Scottish poetry that I could quote which would make the right hon. Gentleman blush, if that were possible, to think that, in the last stage of real national responsibility a Scotsman should sell, not only himelf, but his fellows I thought that those days belonged to a dim and buried past, but it seems that even now we have a remnant of that mind in the Secretary of State for Scotland.

Mr. WRIGHT: I beg to second the Amendment.
In rising to support the observations which have fallen from my hon. Friend the Member for Springburn (Mr. Hardie), I feel that I am doing so under some little difficulty. It is an amazing thing to me that when such an important change is proposed, there should be less than a score of Members out of 615 in this House at nine o'clock. There are only two Cabinet Ministers sitting on the Government Bench at the present time——

HON. MEMBERS: One!

Mr. WRIGHT: Yes, the Secretary of State and a Law Officer—one and a half. We have had a good deal about percentages this evening and we will not quarrel over that aspect of the question. When this question was being considered by the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills, I opposed the change very earnestly and to the best of my ability, and I am so far consistent that I intend to oppose it to the best of my ability this evening. I know quite well, from close contact with a number of men responsible for the administration of local affairs in Scotland, that they are entirely averse to the change that is to take place, and I think that the Secretary of State for Scotland is under an obligation to show that there has been some demand for it from Scotland.
It is a shocking thing to ignore the public opinion of between 4,000,000 and 5,000,000 people, and put them under the heel, as this proposal will, of a Cabinet which consists almost entirely of Englishmen.
There can be no doubt, in my mind at any rate, that there is considerable alarm, which, perhaps, has not manifested itself in Scotland, but which does exist among those who are most closely in touch with the people of Scotland in regard to this proposed change. Having regard to the needs of Scotland, I was surprised to find that in the Gracious Speech from the Throne the question of rating and this particular Bill found a prominent place, because those who know the needs of Scotland know quite well that an entirely different set of questions should have been considered during this Session. As a matter of fact, I am very doubtful whether the proposed rearrangement of rating and valuation will touch the fringe of the problem which concerns the great majority of the people of Scotland, and it seems to me that the Bill which we are considering to-night is an entirely reactionary one and an entirely retrograde step. Take, for instance, the question that I put to the Secretary of State for Scotland in the Standing Committee. Agriculture ought to be the basic industry of every nation, because it is on the food produced that we live. We need food daily, and Scotland is only producing a small proportion of that which it requires. It is capable of producing far more without any additional expert advice. If we acted upon the scientific knowledge and expert advice already available, far more could be produced from the soil and waters of Scotland than is being produced at the present time. Why not act upon the knowledge that we have, rather than strive to obtain additional knowledge which may never he used, since the existing knowledge is not used at the present time?
The question which I put to the Secretary of State for Scotland in the Standing Committee, and to which he did not vouchsafe an answer on that occasion, but which I hope he will answer in this Debate, was as to what special scientific or agricultural knowledge this gentleman whom he proposes to appoint from the Civil Service as the head of this Department
will possess which will give him some special qualification for this particular kind of work. If he has not such knowledge, there is no special virtue in appointing him. The great need of Scotland just now, so far as the majority of the industrial workers are concerned, is to be able to absorb the 140,000 people who are unemployed, the vast number who are only partly employed, and the people who are finding themselves destitute and even worse because of the conditions which prevail. Will the changes proposed in this Bill touch the fringe of any of these questions? I submit that they will not, and that an entirely different set of circumstances is required.
I want to come finally to a question upon which I said a few words in the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills—the question of the Prison Commissioners for Scotland. From the Annual Report of the Prison Commissioners for Scotland for the year 1927, I find that the number of persons admitted to prison had increased in 1926, partly due to the labour troubles in that year. The Report says that the total number of admissions in 1927 was 16,460, as against 17,690 in 1926, and 15,802 in 1925. Will the reorganisation of this Department have any effect in decreasing the number of people who are in prison in Scotland? On the contrary, I think it is highly probable that it will have the reverse effect, because the people who know the conditions and are in close contact with these people will have ceased to function so far as these matters are concerned. There is evidence in the present Report that the Scottish Office ought to be tackling the unemployment problem to a very much greater extent, because it has a bearing upon the number of people who find their way to prison. The Report says:
The Governors make inquiries through the Police and also of the parents of those concerned. Note has previously been made of the large proportion who have lost one or both parents in early life. This fact again entered into the reports for 1927. The part played by unemployment in relation to crime committed by young persons is also brought out in a striking manner by a return obtained from Polmont regarding previous employment of 50 inmates received in consecutive order. It is observed that almost all those sentenced to Polmont Institution were out of employment at the time they committed the crime. An analysis
of the figures shows that the average age at admission was 18 years two months.
Forty-three were idle at the time of committing the offence; four were employed selling newspapers; and only three were in other employment.
The further fact is mentioned in the Report that boys are dismissed from their employment on reaching the age of 18, when a higher rate of insurance becomes payable, and thus they are driven from pillar to post without employment, and associate with evil companions, until they find themselves in prison and get that worst of all starts early in life on the downward road which deprives them in some cases of any future prospects. I think I remember some lines which seem to apply to these people:
They're lost to love and honour,
They're lost to hope and truth;
They're dropping down the ladder rung by rung;
And the measure of their torture is the measure of their youth,
Alas! they knew the worst too young.
The Government are to some extent putting upon the shoulders of the Secretary of State for Scotland the responsibility for the degradation and the loss of the fine spirit and character of these boys when they grow up to manhood, because they have missed in early life that opportunity which ought to have been provided for them. It is an extremely shocking state of affairs, and all who wish well for their country should strive to ameliorate these conditions. There is another point which is constantly brought out in Scotland in particular. People who live there know well how at public meetings it is often declared what a very superior system of education prevails in Scotland as compared with England.

Sir WILFRID SUGDEM: No.

Mr. WRIGHT: I have heard that observation on many occasions and, if the hon. Gentleman has not heard it, he has not attended many public meetings in Scotland in the last 20 years. But, assuming that the statement is correct, it ought to apply to those who are responsible for the government of Scotland.

Notice taken that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members being present——

Mr. WRIGHT: This customary farce of two score Members walking into the Chamber for two minutes, and then departing again is another instance of how not only the Scottish Office but also this very Chamber is out-of-date so far as our Debates are concerned.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Dennis Herbert): The hon. Member must remember that we are not now discussing the constitution of this Chamber.

Mr. WRIGHT: I know that, but I think it was worth saying. It is a great pity the people of Scotland are not here to see it. But I leave that aspect of the question. I was pointing out that, if there be any logic at all in the statement of the superiority of the education that prevails in Scotland, it ought to apply with equal force to those who are responsible for local government, and, if that be true, I cannot understand the object of the Secretary of State in seeking to abolish these Offices. There is one other point so far as the Prison Commissioners are concerned. This report in dealing with the health of prisoners says:
Eighty-one cases of insanity were reported, as compared with 71 last year; 72 of these were insane before admission to prison.
So they have a number of people in England and in Scotland who were arrested as people who were responsible for their conduct, and it is afterwards discovered that they ought not to have been there at all.
68 were untried and four were convicted prisoners; 20 were reported as feebleminded, and of these 11 were handed over to inspectors of poor on discharge.
That reveals a very shocking state of affairs. If I could believe for a moment that, the right hon. Gentleman's proposals were going to improve the social, moral and intellectual position of the people, I should support them wholeheartedly. Having lived there for wellnigh 30 years, I have seen some of the awful conditions that prevail, and in few places are they worse than in my own division of Rutherglen, and I know from the local officials that they look with alarm on this proposal that has been made. I know how utterly futile any appeal of mine to the Secretary of State will be. At an earlier stage to-day he made a special appeal to us on these benches, in a great peroration,
that if we could advance any arguments or bring forward any data which would weigh with him or the Government, he would listen to thorn. My answer is that for five and a half years we have hammered him again and again with arguments and data that could not be disputed and in not one single case, as far as I know, has it ever had the faintest effect upon him or the Government. Therefore, I have no hope that any appeal of mine will have effect, but at any rate we have the satisfaction of registering our protest against this change that is about to be made.

Mr. MACPHERSON: I spoke at considerable length on the Second Reading and I supported the Bill. I have watched the proceedings in Committee and otherwise with very great interest, and I have heard no argument advanced which has made me alter my opinion. I regret very much that I cannot see eye to eye with my colleagues from Scotland above the Gangway. If I thought for a moment that the passage of the Bill belittled in any way the feeling of Scottish nationality that we all have, I should be the first to resist it. I understand that we are discussing the three Amendments on the Paper—the maintenance or abolition of the Board of Health, the Board of Agriculture, and the Prison Commission. I am rather sorry in a way that these three are taken together, but I bow to the ruling; of the Chair, and I think, in the interests of good discussion, it is probably right so to discuss them together. I have already expressed my views pretty strongly about the Board of Agriculture. I am quite convinced, after long experience of watching its work, that the best interests of the Scottish small land holding system and of settlement upon the land will be best served not by a Board but by a Land Settlement Officer, as is proposed under the Bill.
I was very much struck by the speech of the hon. Member for Rutherglen (Mr. Wright), who has just left the House. I strongly object to calling attention to the absence of hon. Members who, very likely, apart from a particular moment when a count is asked for, have been in the Chamber all the afternoon and evening. I was very much struck by this speech which has just been delivered by the hon. Member who,
quite obviously, meant what he said, and spoke with great conviction and sincerity. He made a special appeal for the maintenance of the Prison Commission, and I have no doubt that in Scotland there is a very great feeling that the Prison Commission should be maintained as it is. They have shown over a great number of years very great sensitiveness with regard to their duties and remarkable ability, and, above all—and I think it is a most necessary quality in this connection—very great human sympathy.
But the question at once arises, could the same good work be performed by a cheaper and more efficient organisation? That is the point. Could it be more economical with the same efficiency? I think those are questions which at this time in our political history we have got to ask ourselves and to answer honestly and fairly. I have had experience in my political career of a great number of boards when I was Chief Secretary for Ireland. I frankly tell the House that I did not find the board system an efficient one. I found that when you had to deal with a Board you had to deal not with a unit but with a great number of individuals called a unit by the Legislature. Instead of efficiency and up-to-dateness, I found very often inefficiency and retrogression. I always found that when a board was at all efficient, it had been made efficient by one man and I am perfectly certain that that may be the experience of the Scottish Office. If that be so, I for one should hesitate a long time before I contended against the weight of experience. In this case, I am prepared to accept the view of experienced officials and to accept the proposed Amendment of the Legislature and to have instead of boards, individuals directly responsible to the responsible Minister in the House of Commons.
I do not think there is anything so bad for the State and for the efficient working of the State as to have a Board that is really not responsible to anybody. If you have directly under you and appointed by you and under your control, a carefully-selected man who knows his work, I am quite convinced, in my own mind, after a good deal of experience, that in that way you get efficiency which you do not otherwise get.
Take, for example, the case of the Board of Agriculture. I have nothing to say against the individuals composing that Board, and I quite admit to each and all of them the characteristics of efficiency and ability, but when you give into the control of a Board of this kind a vast amount of money, there is not the same efficiency and care in spending as you have under an official directly responsible to the State. I have pointed in this House time and again to the expenditure of the Board of Agriculture. I believe last year the amount spent by the Board was £450,000 and they put only from 100 to 125 people on the land. Yet the salaries and expenses of that Board amounted to £120,000.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Did that cover salaries and travelling expenses?

Mr. MACPHERSON: I am always willing to submit to any correction which the hon. and learned Member for Argyll (Mr. Macquisten) deigns to make to me, but I have gone very carefully into these figures and I think I am right. I think the amount was £120,000.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Not including tavelling expenses.

Mr. MACPHERSON: The hon. and learned Member still persists in saying it did not include travelling expenses. If it did not, it only makes my case all the stronger. The fact remains that a board of that kind does not have the same efficient control of expenditure with the same efficient results, and I am very strongly of opinion that the proposal made by the Liberal Land Report which was just recently issued, is the proposal which now the Secretary of State for Scotland is adopting in regard to the Board of Agriculture. [HON. MEMBERS: "A new Coalition."] I do not mind a coalition of efficiency at any time. I may be prepared to coalesce with the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) provided he wishes to see something done in the interest of the country as a whole and to see that something is efficiently performed. There is no doubt about it; this Committee which investigated the case of the Board of Agriculture was a purely independent Committee. It was a Committee which had no axe to grind and which probably had no love or great respect for the Scottish Office for all I know, but
the fact remains that that Committee did, after careful and impartial consideration, come to the conclusion that the most effective way of dealing with the land settlement problem of Scotland was the proposal now before the House for the reorganisation of the Scottish Boards. Therefore, I, for one, support that part of the Bill.
Now let me say where I find some little difficulty. I have a little difficulty in regard to the Board of Health, for I confess that if I had the opportunity of speaking on the Board of Health separately I should probably find myself inclined to vote against the proposal for abolishing it. I have watched with great interest the work of that Board, and I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on having so efficient a Board. I do not think there is a report which appears from any Government Department of the same value or merit as the report which is annually produced by the Scottish Board of Health. "By their fruits ye shall know them"—and I know that the late Lord High Commissioner for Scotland, the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. J. Brown) recognises that. I am quite convinced that the Scottish nation as a whole has every reason to be proud of the work which that Board does, but we are dealing now with the general proposition whether in the interests of efficiency or not we should consider the advisability of maintaining the Board system. As I have already said, I have very great objection to the board system, though if it were going to deprive us of our feeling of Scottish nationality, I would even probably support the board system, but I am at variance with my hon. Friends above the Gangway. I do not think for a moment that it affects the question of Scottish nationality. I had a guarantee on the Second Reading that every young Scotsman who is fit to compete for a place in the new Scottish organisation system, will be entitled to compete and entitled to get his place.

Mr. WESTWOOD: And sit for an examination in England?

Mr. MACPHERSON: But there are a great many Scotsmen who are not satisfied with having the limited objectives in the Scottish Office, and who want to come down and sit in examinations
which make the whole world and the British Empire open to them. Consequently, I should hate to feel that my Scottish fellow-countrymen, young and fresh from school and the Universities, should be limited merely to the Scottish Office. Scotland has paid far too big a price for the Empire to be limited, to that field. Consequently, as long as you get that guarantee that no Scotsman will be ineligible for the highest office in a Scottish Government Department, then I say that is a point gained.
There is one other point. There is no doubt at all that when you have a reorganisation on so gigantic a scale—for it is on a gigantic scale—you are bound to have a good deal of anxiety in the minds of the existing officers in the various Departments. We have had experience of the somewhat cruel treatment of officers in various State Departments. When reorganisation has taken place, they have not been looked after and have not been provided for. I would like again to press upon the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for Scotland the demand of the House of Commons—not the desirability, but the demand of the House of Commons—that every single man who may be affected adversely by this reorganisation should be looked after financially. I know that it may be placing the right lion. Gentleman in a difficulty, but I think it is the will of the House of Commons that every man who is in any way adversely affected, either by being asked to retire too soon or by being affected in his pension, should be looked after. I should like to get that guarantee from the right hon. Gentleman. Apart from these adverse observations, so far as the Board of Health is concerned, I am on the whole in favour of this Bill. I think it is a Bill which is going to make for efficiency, and I think it is a Bill which, in the interests of economy and efficiency ought to be supported. [Interruption.] I note that the hon. and gallant Gentleman above the Gangway is the only Welshman present, and he moved a count a few minutes ago.

Lieut.-Colonel WATTS-MORGAN: I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman is going to repeat the offensive, remarks he made before. He called attention to someone who was not in the Chamber. I have not continuously left
the Chamber for more than 10 minutes since Prayers, and I was entitled to see that Scotland should have other representatives present, because the present Government intend to do exactly with Wales as they are doing with Scotland.

Mr. SPEAKER: Wales seems to be coming to the defence of Scotland.

Mr. MACPHERSON: I am exceedingly sorry, and I hope my hon. and gallant Friend will accept my abject apology. I am very sorry, but I did think that it was rather strange that the one Welshman in the Chamber should have interrupted a Scottish Debate. Having said that, I am quite satisfied, and I am glad to see that my hon. and gallant Friend is too. I am going to say again that I support this Bill for the reasons that I have given.

Mr. SKELTON: On the Second Reading of this Bill, it fell to me to make one or two observations and I also spoke in the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills, and, therefore, I do not propose to detain the House at this stage for more than a minute or two. I do not find myself in the position of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ross and Cromarty (Mr. Macpherson), who gives the Bill a general approval, but disapproves of one of its most important features. I am afraid that my disapproval remains practically unaltered, and is quite complete. I see no substance in the argument that boards are inefficient. With slight alterations, the fact is that in the Board of Admiralty here we have one of the most efficient Departments, although the Board of Admiralty may not be exactly on the same footing as the Scottish Board which it is proposed to abolish. This is a proposition which cannot be maintained, in face of the fact that the Government Departments which are most efficient, namely, the Revenue Department and Admiralty Department, are boards. Even if it were true that you could not get efficiency with boards it would only be of very small assistance to the whole question which is here involved. The question which is involved and the question which is at the back of this Bill is whether or not it is wise under the peculiar constitutional relations that exist between England and Scotland to have your central
government of Scotland based on a purely departmental method. With the fullest consideration I can give, reinforced by many views from many quarters of Scotland where one did not expect support, I remain of opinion that there has been for Scotland a very great advantage in a system which brought into direct contact with its administration a considerable number of people drawn from various sections and districts in the country.
It does not matter in England, with your Parliament sitting in London. A Department, from that point of view, is all that is required. The situation is not the same in Scotland, and it is to my mind a matter of more than doubtful wisdom to take away from the government of Scotland, even although it only be on its administrative side, certain features which link up a large and widespread body of opinion with the work of the central administration of Scotland. No argument has been put forward, it seems to me, which touches that point. I am confident that you will find, as a result of these changes, that the interest in Scottish administration will become less, that the Scottish administration will throw a much less wide net over the population, and that you will get a real loss of connection between the popular mind and central administration. It may be said, and indeed it can almost be said with force, that as a connecting link between the popular mind, it cannot be of great importance that you have a Board of Agriculture with three or four heads and a Board of Health with three or four heads and so on.
But that is not the end of it. The other aspect of it is, that your Departmental men are necessarily men who from their youth have been trained in the Civil Service. I do not think that they have become purely denationalised, but I do say, and I believe I am saying it in truth, that they have lost, by being members of that great body of general civil servants, a certain degree of their Scottish turn of mind and their Scottish habits of thought and their intimate contact with Scotland. That is the point. That is what you gain by your Board system. You draw into it from time to time men eminent in other fields in Scotland, lay Scotsmen as opposed to civil servants. I am sure that by that method of drawing into the administration of Scotland from time to time, men not
from mere boyhood but from adult manhood who have been doing devoted work in Scotland, you get far greater connection between Scotland as a whole and its administration than you will do if you rely entirely upon the Civil Service. The importance of that, as I see it, is vital.
I am not one of those who believe in the benefit of Scottish Home Rule to Scotland, to England or to the Empire. Other hon. Members will not agree with me. My view is, and I claim to know something about the situation as well as other Scotsmen, that in the present stage of Scottish development or Empire development Scottish Home Rule is not a desirable thing in itself; but I am certain that it is a good thing to keep contact between Scotland as a whole and its administration, and I am very loth from the point of view that I have mentioned, namely, the feeling that the time has not come for Scottish Home Rule, to take away from Scotland just now in any department of government any special Scottish features which exist. It is along that line of thought that I have never been able to give the proposals of this Bill my personal approval. I cannot deny that at the back of my mind there is a thought that here is a step which looks very reasonable, which appeals to a Member of this House with so much experience as the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ross and Cromarty, who argued about the efficiency of the Department headed by one man, and about slow methods and so forth. That is an argument of far less specific gravity in the subject we are discussing, namely, the administration of Scotland under a united Parliament, and I am sure that it is an argument of far less vitality and force than the argument that it is most important to keep some contact between lay Scotland and its government.
I was amazed at the way in which my right hon. Friend the Member for Ross and Cromarty dealt with the question of the Board of Agriculture. He said that it spent, approximately, £430,000 last year and only brought into existence 125 small holdings. Surely he must know that a great deal of that £430,000 is earmarked for other purposes, and it is not fair to a Board which in adverse circumstances——

Mr. MACPHERSON: I said that there was an allowance of £120,000 for travelling expenditure and only 125 men settled.

Mr. SKELTON: I am dealing not with the amount of travelling expenses, but with the total amount expended.

Mr. MACPHERSON: My hon. Friend must remember that I was assuming that to settle men on the land they had to travel about, and that allowances and expenses are incurred in settling the men on the land. I say that it is a very poor return to settle 125 men on the land when you have £120,000 travelling expenses.

Mr. SKELTON: I must have misunderstood my right hon. Friend. I thought he was comparing, in the first place, the figure of £430,000, which is the total expenditure, with the number of men settled. Even taking the travelling expenses, although I have not looked into that matter closely, I think those travelling expenses are for purposes other than land settlement only. Therefore, I doubt whether it is fair to compare the figure of 125 men settled with £120,000 expenses. I must say in defence of a Board which is apparently drawing very near to its last breath, and I think it should be said in this House before this Bill passes, that land settlement in Scotland under the Board of Agriculture, taking one year with another, has been not less economical, but more economical than it has been in England. Although the figures of the actual cost of the erection of a holding are difficult to arrive at, there seems to be no doubt that the cost of the erection of a holding under the Board of Agriculture in Scotland has been far less than it was under the Department of Agriculture, when it was in their hands. Therefore, in the battle of Department versus Board, the Board wins easily on that point. The cost has been not only far less than when the settlements were undertaken by the Department of Agriculture in England, but less than settlement undertaken by the county councils, with all their local knowledge.
I think it is most unfair and most unjust to treat the work of land settlement by the Board of Agriculture in Scotland as a work which merits condemnation on account of extravagance or on account of inefficiency. When we recollect that
the proportion of failures in Scotland has been very much less than in England, it shows that even where one would suppose that local knowledge was most vitally important and would make an immense amount of difference, namely, in the selection of the holders, this much maligned Board of Agriculture has been able to hold its own with the highly-specialised committees of the county councils, who have known the men from their youth upwards. Therefore, in my judgment, to make an excuse, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Ross and Cromarty practically did——

Mr. MACPHERSON: I did not make an excuse.

Mr. SKELTON: The villain of the piece, according to the right hon. Gentleman, was the Board of Agriculture. He has selected the wrong villain of the piece. If he wanted to find the real villain of the piece in regard to land settlement in Scotland it is the villain upon which the Committee appointed by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland placed their hand—it was the Liberal legislation of 1911 which, in the lowlands where land settlement was its most vital feature, introduced into lowland agriculture practically the crofting system, which every lowland landlord and every lowland farmer knew was as vicious a system of tenure as one could have, because it rests on the principle of dual ownership. I hope that my fears about the Bill are ill-founded, because it would be an ill day if any step taken by a Unionist Government brought nearer by a single inch the possibility of home rule for Scotland.

Mr. JAMES BROWN: My hon. Friend who has just spoken has stood up for Scotland. Any man who stands up for Scotland is a friend of Scotland. This is not so much a party question as a question for all Scotsmen who love their country. Scotsmen are sent to this House to represent Scottish people and to uphold Scottish institutions, where those institutions have proved to be good and have never been proved to be inefficient and I cannot understand their mentality, whether elected as Unionist, Liberal or Labour representatives, in coming here and applauding the idea of taking away practically the only link with our people
that has been left to us. The right hon. Member for Ross and Cromarty has said many things. I think he must give me credit for knowing something about Scotland. I remember an incident in the Scriptures when a person was sent for by a heathen King to come and curse Israel. The light hon. Gentleman rose to curse the Bill, but I am not sure that before he had finished he was not blessing the Bill. I think the right hon. Gentleman gave his case away.
Great play has been made on the word efficiency. What is efficiency? I am sure no one would say that we should give up efficiency for the sake of a few paltry pounds. We have no idea of the vast amount of money that is spent frivolously in many directions, and if we allowed Scotland to spend more freely in the way she would like, I do not think we should be doing anything out of the way at all. It is argued that there will be more efficiency when Boards in Scotland become Departments under the State Will small holdings go on more merrily? Will there be more rural transport? Will anything more be done to assist Scottish agriculture under a Department than was done under the Board system? The Board of Agriculture has been doing its very best under adverse circumstances. I am afraid the Board of Agriculture got less money to spend than it should have had, and I wish the Secretary of State would stand up more boldly and claim more for Scotland. I might have to modify that—I do not know what he has claimed. He may have claimed a great deal; we do know that he has not got anything like what he ought to have got to spend on that one Department alone.
What have these Boards done that they should be eliminated, and why are Departments to be set up instead? England has her own Departments with Ministers responsible to the House of Commons and to the country. There is the Minister for Agriculture, the Minister of Health, the Prison Commissioners; you have all these things in England and yet we in Scotland are to be deprived of the last remnant of our nationality and are to be fobbed off with Departments. On one rather unhappy occasion for some people, although I am still unrepentant, I said that it would take days to discuss any one of the questions raised by the Board of Health, the Board of Agriculture
and the Prison Commission. I am not going to enlarge on that topic this evening, but I want to say that I am not going to give a silent vote to-night and I hope the hon. and learned Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) will have the courage of his convictions to go into the Lobby with us in order to show that there is at least one Scottish Unionist who will stand by and claim the rights of Scotland. I think the hon. and learned Member for Argyllshire (Mr. Macquisten) will also be all right when the test comes.
Scotland is paying very dearly indeed for the last election, and I am certain, in spite of all the red letters that might have been printed and issued, in spite of all the defamatory leaflets issued against the Labour party, that not one would have voted Unionist if he had known that this Bill was coming along which practically denationalises Scotland. I feel so strongly on this matter that I dare not let myself go; I have not language at my disposal. I cannot understand how Scotsmen, doing Scottish business, looking after the interests of Scotland, can put their country aside simply because of party ties. We should look after our country and see that efficiency is maintained. I maintain that the present Boards, bad as they are, because we do not get anything like we ought to get, are much better, will prove far more efficient and be more economical than Departments, and I trust that at the eleventh hour the Secretary of State will not allow Scotland to be subjected to this humiliation. It is a humiliation, and I am sure that in the days to come the people of Scotland will see that it has been a humiliation and will deal drastically with hon. Members who dared to take away the only remnant left of Scottish nationality.

10.0 p.m.

Sir J. GILMOUR: I have listened with interest to this Debate, as I am sure have all Members of the House. If I felt for a single moment that I was taking an action which would denationalise my country, any action which would deny to the Scottish people the right and freedom to take part in forming the machine which governs their country, I should not be standing at this Box bringing this Measure before the House of Commons This Bill does not spring from a Cabinet desirous of inflicting
injury upon Scotland. Its origin is with those who are responsible for the government of Scotland, and I take my full share in that responsibility. The proposition was put before the Cabinet by myself and those who advised me, and I desire to put very plainly to this House, and through the House of Commons to Scotland, the reasons why I am asking the House to assent to it. What is it that we are all concerned with? Surely it is in moving with the circumstances in which we live and making such changes in the machinery as we may think will make for greater efficiency.
I listened with interest to the speech of the right hon. Member for Ross and Cromarty (Mr. Macpherson), who has had experience of government by boards on a fairly large scale in Ireland, and one of the first things I did on taking office was to go over to Ireland and consult with some of those who were carrying on the administration in Ireland to ascertain what they thought of the system. I probed into the reasons which actuated them in abolishing the system of boards and putting in departments. Of course, all this would not have been sufficient. It was clear that I had to make these propositions to Parliament upon grounds which seemed good to me as responsible for the administration as I found it. What did I find? In the first place, whether hon. Gentlemen like it or not, the essential fact to remember is that the real controlling power lies in this House, and that as long as you have a United Kingdom and Parliament it is bound to lie in this House. The responsibility must be with the Government of the day to Parliament, and the Minister must be responsible to Parliament. Whether it is a board system or a departmental system that is the essence of our Parliamentary system of Government. It seems, however, to have been forgotten by some of the hon. Members who have spoken.
If that is the case—and I think it is indisputably the case—what is the problem that lies before us? You have your Scottish Office at Dover House. In that office you must have a number of officials who are capable of advising the Minister upon certain aspects of the problem. To that office must come from the departments in Edinburgh, working in Edinburgh as boards or departments, on the
problems with which we have to deal from time to time there must come to London those who speak with knowledge of the local circumstances. It is, of course, obvious that in the working out of that system there will be access to the Minister not only by those who are beads of departments or boards, but by technical advisers and officers. I say frankly that since I have been in my present position I have found that there was nothing which debarred any single technical officer who had any question or problem which he thought ought to be put to the Minister—nothing to prevent his putting it to the Minister.
Let me take one of the points which it is of importance to remember—the problem of housing with which the Board of Health are entrusted. It is one of the most important problems. The Director of Housing has not been a member of the Board of Health, but everyone who knows what has been going on knows full well that the Director of Housing has had access to myself and to the Under-Secretary, not only here in London but in Edinburgh on many occasions. Under the system of departments which I am setting up, there is nothing to prevent an arrangement by which the technical officer shall come into the closest possible touch with myself, with the Under-Secretary, or with the heads of that department. I have said before that in my judgment a responsible head, with the full responsibility of his office and with the knowledge that he has to give advice to his Minister, is infinitely preferable to a system of boards. That is borne out by every inquiry and commission which has studied this matter. Therefore, I am not moving in this matter without a very great measure of support.
Some hon. Members have said to me that I have not said to this House or to the Committee upstairs that there have been deliberate matters of inefficiency on the part of members of the boards. Those who understand in the smallest degree the responsibilities of a Minister in my position, who has to answer to this House for all the acts of those who are under him, whether a board or not a board, knows full well that it is I who take full responsibility both for good deeds and for any mistakes, and I am bound to take that responsibility. It is impossible
for me here to do other than speak in generalities on these matters. It would never do, it would be highly improper, if I were to make any direct references to the things of which I am cognisant. But it is quite right that I should say that, judging these things in general, I have found that when a decision was required on a matter of urgency it was infinitely preferable to have a head of the department to whom I could go with the feeling that he could advise me, after consultation, no doubt, with those working with him, but advising me directly on his own responsibility, what steps I should take.
Under a system of boards you go to the chairman of the board and you say to him: "I think that so-and-so should be done, and it is very desirable that it should be done as rapidly as possible, in the interests of the State and of the service." and he is bound to call his board together and discuss with them whether this particular method of solving the problem is the right or the wrong method. What happens? Because of that system you have a problem debated by a board and possibly a division of opinion arising on the board. It may be either that a compromise is reached, and the result is that the recommendation to the Minister is a compromise of which he is not able to judge the pros and cons; or he gets a recommendation from the board in which there may be a majority report and a minority report, and then the Minister has to make up his mind which side of the board he would support, the majority or the minority, whether with the chairman of the board in the minority or with the chairman of the board in the majority. That is a system which, I think I can demonstrate to the House, is fundamentally unsound. It leads to delay, and it is not the most efficient way of dealing with these problems.
What are we proposing to do? We are proposing to substitute for this board system—which was established to meet other circumstances in other times—a system which is common to every one of the departments in England, which has existed, and with satisfaction, in regard to education in Scotland, where you have had the official at the head of that department responsible to the Minister. There have been all sorts of things said
about efficiency or non-efficiency—contradictory statements as to whether the general public in Scotland have had reason to complain of this or that department—but as the Minister responsible I know full well that there has never been a week in the years that I have held my present office that I have not received criticisms or complaints about this department or the other. In the circumstances, what justification is there for hon. Gentlemen, who have pelted me with questions about the inadequacy of this or the delay of that, saying to me that I had no right to come to the House and suggest to them a method by which we shall obtain greater efficiency?
How are we to obtain it? I believe that we will obtain it, first of all, by abolishing the direct system of patronage. I do not want here to say that the use of patronage in making these appointments has been unfair, but I do say that if you are to have any measure of patronage it ought to be a limited measure of patronage which shall be subject to the Civil Service Commissioners. We have worked hitherto under a policy of patronage which had none of these restrictions. People talk to me about finding men who are in touch with local feeling and with a knowledge of agriculture, or of education, or of health matters, but what you want in these departments are people who have some knowledge of administration. Will anyone tell me that in the case of agriculture for instance, you are going to get people, drawn from even the highest farming class in Scotland, who can bring into the board concerned sufficient knowledge to deal with all circumstances of all types in Scotland, or that a man can make himself a "know-all" in regard to any of these subjects? That is not possible, and any attempt at a method of government of that kind will fail utterly. What you want is a man of sound judgment with a knowledge of administration and a training in administration, who, when various interests come before a government department, can weigh and sift the arguments pro and con and give his judgment without bias towards one side or the other, and recommend to the Minister the course which he thinks right.
We have heard much about the technical experts. I am not averse from, nor will any regulation which I make prevent, intercourse between the experts and those responsible for administration. But is the House of Commons to give up its right to the final word? Parliament must direct policy and control the experts. We know that the expert is often carried beyond the bounds of what is possible in finance or in relation to actual affairs. Is the expert always to have his way? I know many hon. Gentlemen opposite who would be the first to deny the right of the military or naval experts to carry out what they would desire, if they had their way. So it would be with the man of science. If the medical man had his way, he might possibly impose upon Parliament and the country a system—eminently desirable no doubt in itself—but so extravagant or so much in advance of the time that Parliament could not tolerate it. I challenge hon. Gentlemen opposite to show me that what they are asking for is practical. We are prepared to give the technical expert every opportunity of expressing his views, of being in close consultation with the head of his Department and with the Minister, and of putting fully his point of view, but the final word must be with the Minister responsible to Parliament.

Mr. HARDIE: I take it that the right hon. Gentleman is referring to what I said and I think he is, unintentionally, misrepresenting what I said. I was pleading that the expert should not be shut out as he is to-day. It is not a question of saying that the expert is to decide. We are still dealing with administration and my speech was based on the idea of retaining the body which is going to give you the largest number of people who can take in expert views. There is no good in presenting expert views of farming, for example, to those who know nothing about the subject.

Sir J. GILMOUR: If you want to get expert views upon agriculture, you have to go to the bodies who are constantly working in connection with agriculture.

Mr. HARDIE: That is what I am saying.

Sir J. GILMOUR: Those bodies can place their views before the Department, but it is not in the Department nor in the Board that you find the expert knowledge. The duty of the Department or the Board is to judge and weigh these matters. It has been said that it would be desirable if an undertaking were given that those in the present Boards will be fairly treated in the changes that are being made. That undoubtedly will be done. In the case of the Board of Agriculture there is no intention of removing the present Chairman of the Board. He will automatically become the head of the Department, for such time as the age limit permits.
If I turn to the Prison Commissioners, both the present holders of the Prison Commission will eventually retire on the appointed day, which will be the day chosen with reference to the easiest course for making the change over. These two are approaching, if they have not already approached closely, the age of retirement. If I turn to the Board of Health, there the Chairman of the old Board, unfortunately, through ill-health, has had to go, and the medical member, Sir Leslie Mackenzie, who is well known to Members of this House, has retired. There has never been a time in the history of the administration of the offices in Scotland when this change over could be made more easily, with less disturbance, and with less difficulty, as far as the individuals are concerned, and it is very largely because of that very fact that we desire the House now to give us this opportunity to strengthen and improve the administration in the sole interest of efficiency.

Dr. DRUMMOND SHIELS: I think we realise the frankness and straightforwardness of the Secretary of State for Scotland in accepting full responsibility for having put this proposal before the Cabinet and before this House. We admire his courage, but, at the same time, I think we are all of us, on this side, of the opinion that he is letting Scotland down in this matter, and, unfortunately, it is not the first time that Scotland has been let down by this Government. This is only the culmination of a series of acts which have all tended towards either taking away some of the privileges which Scotland enjoyed,
or making it still more like a province of England. The right hon. Gentleman said that we must change with the times, but he has not shown us that the taking away of a Board system and replacing it by a Departmental system is necessarily going with the times. I think it is the present Government which have set up an Electricity Commission and a Broadcasting Commission. They have set up Boards to deal with these matters, and surely these are very modern and very important things. If they have thought it was not desirable to put one person in charge of these matters, but to have a number of people round a table discussing and deciding on ways and means, I think it shows that something has yet to be said for the Board system.
The right hon. Member for Ross and Cromarty (Mr. Macpherson) again expressed his approval of the Bill, but with a good deal of modification this time, and I think it is obvious that a study of the Measure has convinced him that the case for it is not quite so strong. After all, it is a very tragic spectacle that the Liberal Members for Scotland have ceased to stand up for the liberties and independence of Scotland, and that they are content to take the subordinate and lowly position which this Conservative Government seem determined to assign to our country. I think the right hon. Gentleman, in giving us the case of Ireland, was not giving us the case of a country which could be compared properly with Scotland in this matter, because there is no doubt that the Board system does suit the genius of the Scottish people. I agreed very much with what the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) said so well, and I am sure we appreciate the courage which he showed and which it always takes for an individual to differ from his party. He, obviously, spoke quite conscientiously and with a great deal of knowledge when he opposed this Bill. The right hon. Gentleman made a good deal of the fact that the real controlling power is Parliament, but we all know that Parliament is becoming less and less a controlling power with each Bill that comes to the House. Administration is becoming now much more important, and Ministers are getting a great deal more power and liberty to work by regulations, and a great many things which are of importance in the administration of the
country never come before Parliament at all. Therefore, it is not quite true to say that everything which happens in the administration of Scotland will necessarily and primarily come before Parliament, because that is not the case.
I was much interested in what the right hon. Gentleman said about technical men. This is a subject of great importance. It is of increasing importance, because in all Departments of Government and administration the technical expert is becoming more important, and his place in regard to other administrative bodies is becoming increasingly studied and recognised. In spite of all that the right hon. Gentleman says, that he will consult the experts and that he will be in touch with the technical people, this Bill does not show any method by which that can be accomplished. In the Beard of Health at present there are the head of the Medical Department, the head of the National Health Insurance Department, the head of the Pensions Department and the head of the Law Department. All these heads of departments will have to take one step back when this Bill is passed. Their decisions and their advice will come to the Minister by way of the new head of the Department, who will be a civil servant, and have no technical knowledge, and he will not be in a position to give any greater weight to the advice of his experts than will the right hon. Gentleman himself. As a matter of fact, all that the right hon. Gentleman is getting by this system is somebody else to make up his mind for him, with no better authority and no better ability to do it, but probably rather less. That person will be in the same position as regards knowledge of these matter as the right hon. Gentleman, and all that will happen will be that these technical men, instead of having direct access to the Minister, will have to go through these civil servants.
The Minister says that there is no reason why he should not deal with the experts direct. Where is the discipline of the department to be then? If the head of the department is to be the head, he has the right to see the Minister. If, behind his back, any of the heads of the technical department are to see the Minister, and give perhaps different advice to that of the head of the department, where will the discipline of the
department be? The suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman that he will not lose touch with his technical experts, and will still keep the discipline of his department, will not work in practice. It is interesting to know that this question of the technical and administrative men is becoming a matter of very great importance throughout many branches of our public life. That is why I regard this Bill as such a backward step. I have recently had some experience in hearing the views of technical officers in our Colonial Service. That service at first was clearly an administrative and a clerical service; technical men were not there at all, but during the last few generations we have had agricultural and forestry experts, doctors and other technical people, and it is a matter of great moment to them, and is being seriously considered in various connections, how they are going to be placed in relation to the administrators and civil servants who have an older footing in the service.
This Bill proposes a method which is retrograde and against the whole tendency of the recommendations of those who have studied the subject, and it seems to me that if the right hon. Gentleman tries to get over the difficulty by consulting the technical experts independently he will create chaos and cause a lack of discipline in the various Departments. The right hon. Gentleman speaks about the difficulty that arises if there is a division of opinion on the Board. Then is the opportunity for him to make up his mind, after hearing first one side and then the other. Personally, I would much rather hear two sides of a question, and then make up my mind on it, than take a finished opinion from an individual who was no more qualified to give it than I was, although I had to be responsible for it.
I was glad the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ross and Cromarty referred to the Board of Health, because its case represents one of the greatest tragedies of this Bill. The Board of Health is the most efficient and up-to-date Government Department which I know. It has done a great deal of work, not only in the mere administration of its Department, but in stimulating and strengthening Scottish local authorities in various ways; and, having regard to other Departments of which we know something, I think the change can only
mean less efficiency and not more. In this connection I would like to ask why there has been such delay in filling up the medical post on that Board which is vacant? I wonder whether we shall see a real evidence of the Anglicising of the Scottish system by the transfer to the Board of someone from the Ministry of Health? I would like to know why promotion is not being made from among those in the Department at the present time who are eligible for that post?
One of the great features of the work of the Boards in Scotland has been their success with local authorities. Scottish local authorities are sometimes a little difficult to manage. They are independent, they are sensitive, and they do not like too many instructions from the central authority. It has been one of the principal functions of this Board not only to anticipate the needs of local authorities, but to meet them when they were not satisfied, and they have done that work with a great deal of success. If they now come up against the ukases of a typical Whitehall bureaucrat, there will be a good deal of trouble for the right hon. Gentleman. I do not think it is of much use to hope for the withdrawal of this Bill, but I feel that it is the duty of those of us who are Scotsmen, and who object to and resent this change, to make our protest here; and I hope that at some other time, when conditions are more favourable, and when a wiser Government is in power, that we may find a reversion to that system which, as I have said, is suitable to the genius of the Scottish people, is essentially Scottish in character, and helps to perpetuate and to carry out those traditions of the Scottish people of which we are all proud.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: During the course of the Committee proceedings, the whole of this subject was very well discussed and thoroughly analysed, and now we feel that it is essential for us to make a strong protest against these proposals. The Secretary of State for Scotland has already given us an indication of dissent as regards his experience in the administration of the office which he holds. There is one justification for our position, and it is one which is qualified by his own predecessor's authority. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West
Fife (Mr. W. Adamson), on having the case presented to him, said that he had experienced no difficulty in managing the administrative business of his office under present conditions. The right hon. Gentleman may think that opinion is of little value, but it is the opinion of one who has held the position of Secretary for Scotland, and so far as his qualifications are concerned, I do not think anyone will take exception to them now, because he has put up a case which is not in agreement with that of the right hon. Gentleman.
The argument of the right hon. Gentleman is that he must have one man in particular who is going to scrutinise and thoroughly examine the work of a particular Department. I think it would be a far more reasonable attitude to adopt that under the present system of Boards you should have men specially well qualified, indeed specialists in the consideration of these important issues who should do their utmost to focus all the evidence which they can bring to bear and all their own personal experience. This should be presented to the Government, and I think that would be by far the best course to adopt. If you are going to say, as evidently is the intention of the right hon. Gentleman, that as a matter of fact during the career of the right hon. Gentleman and the present Government this system has failed entirely, and that that is the reason why he feels it is necessary to take that course, then we could reasonably arrive at the conclusion that perhaps there is some deficiency in the right hon. Gentleman's own findings as regards the case which has been presented to him.
If we take the Prison Commissioners we have very strong views that these men have done special service for Scotland. I might mention the situation which is prevalent at the moment in Glasgow where a gang of those considered to be ruffians have armed themselves, and have had very strong condemnation meted out to them from a Judge of the land. There has been a special call to the magistrates of Glasgow asking them to deal very severely with these cases. The answer made by one of the magistrates was that if these lads could find employment they were not likely to be armed in a way which has produced such serious trouble to the community. Such a case, in my
view, is a very effective one for the consideration of a board, and not one suitable for the consideration of an official who would have simply to adjudicate upon the point and advise the Minister. Such a board, to which the Secretary of State for Scotland has frequently paid a tribute, consists of those who have very largely made a life study of criminality and have used their influence, backed up by their personal knowledge, in order to give advice in certain directions not only in the interests of those who are suffering imprisonment but also as to how they shall be led in the future. The question of the Prison Commissioners is of even more importance than that of the other two Boards, because, rather than looking at this matter in the formal sort of way in which it would be dealt with by an official, as contrasted with those who have at heart the personal interests of these who come under such serious condemnation from the law of the land, it is of the utmost value to the country that there should be a board giving special consideration to these issues and directing the mind of the Government thereon.
From the wider point of view of the Board of Health, the Board of Agriculture and the Prison Commissioners, the strength of our case lies in the fact that

Scotland, situated as she is, requires those Boards to be available in Edinburgh for consultation with those who represent the local authorities. As a previous speaker has pointed out, the case is not the same as in England, where you have a Parliament situated in London, and it does raise the wider issue of greater powers for Scotland which would enable her to deal with these matters in a very different way. It is possible that that issue may be accelerated. Indeed, my own view is that the carrying of this Bill will accelerate the growing demand for that power which Scotland really requires, so that she may have her advisers, her Departments and her specialists going into the interests of the country at large. We do feel that the Government are handing over these matters to a mere circumscribed bureaucracy which is gaining a greater hold upon the control of affairs, not only in Scotland but in the country generally, and that there is greater need for the expansion of the minds of those who will help us to adjudicate upon these issues in a far more effectual fashion than this Bill is able to do.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 196; Noes, 94.

Division No. 266.]
AYES.
[10.45 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Christie, J. A.
Ganzoni, Sir John


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Clarry, Reginald George
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
God, Sir Park


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Colfox, Major Wm. Philip
Gower, Sir Robert


Apsley, Lord
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Cope, Major Sir William
Grant, Sir J. A.


Atkinson, C.
Couper, J. B.
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islingtn., N.)
Hacking, Douglas H.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hamilton, Sir George


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Hammersley, S. S.


Bennett, A. J.
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hannan, Patrick Joseph Henry


Bethel, A.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Harland, A.


Betterton, Henry B.
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian


Brass, Captain W.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Briggs, J. Harold
Dixey, A. C.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Briscoe, Richard George
Drewe, C.
Hennessy. Major Sir G. R. J.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hilton, Cecil


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Edge, Sir William
Holt, Captain H. P.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Bullock, Captain M.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Burman, J. B.
England, Colonel A.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hudson, Capt A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Campbell, E. T.
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Hume, Sir G. H.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Fenby, T. D
Hurd, Percy A.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Fielden, E. B.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Ford, Sir P. J.
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.


Chapman, Sir S.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Charteris, Brigadler-General J.
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Nuttall, Ellis
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Jephcott, A. R.
Oakley, T.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Owen, Major G.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Pennefather, Sir John
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Penny, Frederick George
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Storry-Deans, R.


Knox, Sir Alfred
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Lamb, J. Q
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frame)
Sueter, Rear Admiral Murray Fraser


Little, Dr. E. Graham
Philipson, Mabel
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Power, Sir John Cecil
Tasker, R. Inigo.


Long, Major Eric
Preston, William
Templeton, W. P.


Looker, Herbert William
Price, Major C. W. M.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Lougher, Lewis
Radford, E. A.
Tomlinson, R. P.


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vert
Raine, Sir Walter
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Ramsden, E.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Waddington, R.


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Held, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


MacIntyre, Ian
Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


McLean, Major A.
Remer, J. R.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Wavland, Sir William A.


Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Wells, S. R.


Macquisten, F. A.
Ropner, Major L.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Rye, F. G.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Womersley, W. J.


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dgt & Hyde)


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Sassoon. Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Savory, S. S.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Nelson, Sir Frank
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)



Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Captain Margesson and Captain Wallace.


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)



Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Smithers, Waldron



NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Scurr, John


Alexander. A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Sexton, James


Amman, Charles George
Hardie, George D.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Barnes, A.
Hirst, G. H.
Shinwell, E.


Barr, J.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Such, Charles H.


Batey, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Skelton, A. N.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Broad. F. A.
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bromfield, William
Kennedy, T.
Snell, Harry


Bromley, J.
Lansbury, George
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Lawrence, Susan
Stephen, Campbell


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Lawson, John James
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Lee, F.
Sutton, J. E.


Charleton, H. C.
Lindley, F. W.
Thurtle, Ernest


Compton, Joseph
Lowth, T.
Tinker, John Joseph


Connolly, M.
Lunn, William
Townend, A. E.


Cove, W. G.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Mackinder. W.
Viant, S. P.


Dalton, Hugh
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Watson, W. M. (Dumfermilne)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Day, Harry
Murnin, H.
Wellock, Wilfred


Duncan, C.
Naylor, T. E.
Westwood, J.


Gardner, J. P.
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Palin, John Henry
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Gibbins, Joseph
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Gillett, George M.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wright, W.


Gosling, Harry
Potts, John S.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Greenall, T.
Ritson, J.



Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Sakiatvala, Shapurji
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Whiteley.


Groves, T.
Salter, Dr. Alfred



Grundy, T. W.
Scrymgeour, E.

Mr. HARDIE: I beg to move, in page 1, line 7, to leave out the words "the Board of Agriculture for Scotland."

Mr. J. BROWN: I beg to second the Amendment.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 202: Noes, 92.

Division No. 267.]
AYES.
[10.52 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Gilmour, Lt.-Col, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Oakley, T.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Owen, Major G.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
God, Sir Park
Pennefather, Sir John


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Gower, Sir Robert
Penny, Frederick George


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Apsley, Lord
Grant, Sir J. A.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Atkinson, C.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Philipson, Mabel


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Hacking, Douglas H.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Hamilton, Sir George
Preston, William


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Price, Major C. W. M.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Hammersley, S. S.
Radford, E. A.


Bennett, A. J.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Raine, Sir Walter


Bethel, A.
Harland, A.
Ramsden, E.


Betterton, Henry B.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian
Reid, D. D. (County Down)


Brass, Captain W.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Remer, J. R.


Briggs, J. Harold
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Roberts. E. H. G. (Flint)


Briscoe, Richard George
Hilton, Cecil
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Holt, Captain H. P.
Ropner, Major L.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Rye, F. G.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bullock, Captain M.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Samuel, Samuel (W'deworth, Putney)


Burman, J. B.
Hume, Sir G. H.
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hurd, Percy A.
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Campbell, E. T.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustavo D.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Savery, S. S.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Chapman, Sir S.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Jephcott, A. R.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Christie, J. A.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Smithers, Waldron


Clarry, Reginald George
Jones, Henry Haydn, (Merioneth)
Somerville. A. A. (Windsor)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Knox, Sir Alfred
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Lamb. J. Q.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Cope, Major Sir William
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Storry-Deans, R.


Couper, J. B
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Long, Major Eric
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islingtn. N.)
Looker, Herbert William
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Lougher, Lewis
Tasker, R. Inigo.


Crooks. J. Smedley (Deritend)
Lucas-Tooth. Sir Hugh Vere
Templeton, W. P.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Herman
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Tomlinson, R. P.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Macintyre, Ian
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
McLean, Major A.
Waddington, R.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Dawson, Sir Phillip
Macquisten, F, A.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Dixey, A. C.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Wayland. Sir William A.


Drewe, C.
Marriott, Sir J, A. R.
Wells, S. R


Eden, Captain Anthony
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Edge, Sir William
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark. Lanark)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford. Lichfield)


England, Colonel A.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Everard, W. Lindsay
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Womersley, W. J.


Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Morden, Colonel Walter Grant
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Fenhy, T. D.
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Worthington, Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Fielden, E. B.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Ford, Sir P. J.
Neville, Sir Reginald J.



Fraser, Captain Ian
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Captain Wallace and Captain Margesson.


Ganzoni, Sir John
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)



Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Nuttall, Ellis



NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Duncan, C.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)


Ammon, Charles George
Charleton, H. C.
Gardner. J. P.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Compton, Joseph
Gibbins, Joseph


Barr, J.
Connolly, M.
Gillett, George M.


Batey, Joseph
Cove, W. G.
Gosling, Harry


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Crawfurd, H. E.
Greenall, T.


Broad, F. A.
Dalton, Hugh
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Coins)


Bromfield, William
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Grenfell, D, R. (Glamorgan)


Bromley, J.
Day, Harry
Groves, T.


Grundy, T. W.
Murnin, H.
Stephen, Campbell


Hall, F. (York., W. R., Normanton)
Naylor, T. E.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Oliver, George Harold
Sutton, J. E.


Hardie, George D.
Palin, John Henry
Thurtle, Ernest


Henderson, Rt Hon. A. (Burnley)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Tinker, John Joseph


Hirst, G. H.
Potts, John S.
Townend, A. E.


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Ritson, J.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Viant, S. P.


Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sakiatvala, Shapurji
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Kelly, W. T.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Kennedy, T.
Scrymgeour, E.
Wellock, Wilfred


Lansbury, George
Scurr, John
Westwood, J.


Lawrence, Susan
Sexton, James
Whiteley, W.


Lawson, John James
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Lee, F.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Lindley, F. W.
Shinwell, E.
Windsor, Walter


Lowth, T.
Sitch, Charles H.
Wright, W.


Lunn, William
Skelton, A. N.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Mac Donald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)



Mackinder, W.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Snell, Harry
Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Paling.


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip

Mr. HARDIE: I beg to move, in page 1, line 7, to leave out the words "and the Prison Commissioners for Scotland."

Mr. MACLEAN: I beg to second the Amendment.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 200; Noes, 93.

Division No. 268.]
AYES.
[11.0 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Dawson, Sir Philip
Jephcott, A. R


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S.
Dixey, A. C.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Drewe, C.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Apsley, Lord
Eden, Captain Anthony
King, Commodore Henry Douglas


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Edge, Sir William
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Atkinson, C.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Lamb, J. Q.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
England, Colonel A.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Long, Major Eric


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Fenby, T. D.
Looker, Herbert William


Bennett, A. J.
Fielden, E. B.
Lougher, Lewis


Bethel, A.
Ford, Sir P. J.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Betterton, Henry B.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Brass, Captain W.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
MacIntyre, Ian


Briggs, J. Harold
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
McLean, Major A.


Briscoe, Richard George
Goff, Sir Park
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Gower, Sir Robert
Macquisten, F. A.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Grant, Sir J. A.
Margesson, Captain D


Bullock, Captain M.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Burman, J. B.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hacking, Douglas H.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw


Campbell, E. T.
Hamilton, Sir George
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt, R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Hammersley, S. S.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Chapman, Sir S.
Harland, A.
Morden, Col. W. Grant


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Christie, J. A.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Nelson, Sir Frank


Clarry, Reginald George
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian
Neville, Sir Reginald J.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Colfox, Major William Phillips
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Nicholson. O. (Westminster)


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hilton, Cecil
Nuttall, Ellis


Couper, J. B.
Holt, Capt. H. P.
Oakley, T.


Cowan, Sir Win, Henry (Islingtn., N.)
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Owen, Major G.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Pennefather, Sir John


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Penny, Frederick George


Crooks, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Hume, Sir G. H.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hurd, Percy A.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Philipson, Mabel


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Preston, William


Price, Major C. W. M.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A.D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)
Waddington, R.


Radford, E. A.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Raine, Sir Walter
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Ramsden, E.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Rawson, Sir Cooper
Smithers, Waldron
Wayland, Sir William A.


Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Wells, S. R.


Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Remer, J. R.
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Ropner, Major L.
Storry-Denns, R.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Womersley, W. J.


Rye, F, G.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Tasker, R. Inigo.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Sandeman, N. Stewart
Templeton, W. P.



Sanderson, Sir Frank
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Major Sir William Cope and Sir Victor Warrender.


Savery, S. S.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.



NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Grundy, T. W.
Scrymgeour, E.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Scurr, John


Ammon, Charles George
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Sexton James


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hardie, George D.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Barnes, A.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Barr, J.
Hirst, G. H.
Shinwell, E.


Batey, Joseph
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Sitch, Charles H.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
John, William (Rhonda, West)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Snell, Harry


Bromfield, William
Kelly, W. T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Bromley, J.
Kennedy, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Lansbury, George
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Brown, James (Ayr and Butt)
Lawrence, Susan
Sutton, J. E.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Lawson, John James
Thurtle, Ernest


Charleton, H. C.
Lee, F.
Tinker, John Joseph


Compton, Joseph
Lindley, F. W.
Tomlinson, R. P.


Connolly, M.
Lowth, T.
Townend, A. E.


Cove, W. G.
Lunn, William
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Viant, S. P.


Dalton, Hugh
Mackinder, W.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Day, Harry
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Wellock, Wilfred


Duncan, C.
Murnin, H.
Westwood, J.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Naylor, T. E.
Whiteley, W.


Gardner, J. P.
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Palin, John Henry
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Gibbins, Joseph
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Windsor, Walter


Gillett, George M.
Potts, John S.
Wright, W.


Gosling, Harry
Ritson, J.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Greenall, T.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)



Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Sakiatvala, Shapurji
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Groves, T.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Mr. B. Smith and Mr. Paling.

CLAUSE 4.—(Office of Deputy Clerk Register to cease.)

Mr. MACQUISTEN: I beg to move to leave out the Clause.
I have a number of Amendments on the Order Paper, dealing with the Keeper of the Registers and Records, the office of Keeper of the Minute Book and the Appointment of Assistant Extractor and Clerks. This is the first and the most important; all the rest are consequential. This is a Bill for the reorganisation of offices in Scotland, and, differing from other hon. Members who have spoken, I think it is a necessary Measure. One of the features of a Council of War is that it never does anything. Similarity, if you have boards, it must be very difficult for the Secretary of State to do his
job. It must be infinitely better to communicate with one man than with a committee, but as the Office of Deputy-Clerk Register, and the Keeper of the Registers and Records, have nothing to do with the Scottish Office they should not be in the Bill at all. The views that I am expressing are views that have been communicated by the Law Agents' Society of Scotland and the Glasgow Faculty of Procurators, a large body of solicitors dealing with property. These gentlemen object to this particular Clause, and I will state shortly why. For 300 years there has been a Register of Deeds in Scotland, in which all the deeds dealing with Scottish property have been recorded, giving absolute security to those who registered. The registers have been open to the public, who could search them
and find out anything that they wanted to see. One of the fundamental features of that was that one man prepared the deeds, and when he had finished another man took possession and he was the Keeper of the Deeds. They never had the two offices combined in one because the functions were different. The one man might make some mistake and he might put it right in his own hand. Once it came into the hands of the second man he would never put it right except with the permission of the Court of Session on special application. The Law Agents of Scotland feel that there has been greater security under the present system.
I notice, on reading the Financial Memorandum, that there is a reference to the saving of money. Whose money? Not the money of the State. Who pays for the Register House? The law agents and solicitors pay for it. The Register House is a self-supporting body; it pays for itself, and more than pays for itself. What does the Treasury seek to do? It says: "Here is an opportunity for taking a little money from Scotland." They will save so much a year by depriving those who own heritable property in Scotland of one of the safeguards and securities of their property. It will not be saving money at all, but taking the money that belongs to other people. They have no right to come along and persuade the Secretary of State that this new scheme will make for efficiency. It is not going to make for efficiency. It is going to be attended by what the law agents of Scotland consider to be a certain amount of risk. Nor does the Bill provide that the new Keeper, who is to be both Keeper and Register, is to be a qualified conveyancer of 10 years' standing, as has been the case hitherto, nor has his staff to show that it possesses some knowledge of conveyancing law. They have only to pass a Civil Service examination. That will impair the efficiency of Register House.
At any rate that is the view of those learned gentlemen of the different faculties both in Glasgow and Edinburgh. It is their clients' money that is to be disposed of. They have made representations to the Scottish Office but without success. The Secretary of State for Scotland is the most hard-worked member of the Cabinet and has far too much
work to do. I hope that under this Reorganisation Bill he will get his work much more within his grasp. I feel that these particular Clauses have been imposed upon him by the Treasury with the idea of saving some money. I cannot see that he or any other person in his Department knows about the Scottish system of registration. Even in my own business I was not fully apprised of the effects of this Bill. Unfortunately, I was not able to attend because I was busy trying to protect the small shopkeepers against the joint depredations of the Socialist party and the Home Secretary. I take it, however, that one of the reasons for having a Report stage and a Third Reading of a Bill, is in order that those who have not been able to express their views in Committee may have an opportunity of doing so at one of the later stages. I urge on the Secretary of State that he should take into consideration the fact that the powerful bodies I have mentioned are opposed to these proposals. I ask him respectfully to withdraw them at present and to consult the bodies concerned.

Mr. E. BROWN: I beg to second the Amendment.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND: This Amendment cannot be accepted. The Government propose to appoint a Keeper of the Registers and Records instead of a Deputy Clerk Register. The Deputy Clerk Register has not been in existence for several years, and what is proposed is to appoint an officer who will take his place, and who will be over the three principal departments, namely, the Records, the Sasines and the Deeds. These departments are all closely related and ought to be co-ordinated, and the proper person to do that is the Keeper of the Register and Records. This proposal is approved, I think, by the legal authorities in Scotland, and, what is more important, it also has the approval of the people of Scotland.

Amendment negatived.

CLAUSE 5.—(Keeper of the Registers and Records of Scotland.)

Amendment made: In page 4, line 32, after the word "State" insert the words "after consultation with the Lord President of the Court of Session"—[Sir J. Gilmour.]

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

The House divided: Ayes, 175; Noes, 78.

Division No. 269.]
AYES.
[11.20 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Owen, Major G.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Goff, Sir Park
Penny, Frederick George


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Gower, Sir Robert
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Apsley, Lord
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Philipson, Mabel


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Preston, William


Atkinson, C.
Hacking, Douglas H.
Price, Major C. W. M.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Hamilton, Sir George
Radford, E. A.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Raine, Sir Walter


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Hammersley, S. S.
Ramsden, E.


Bethel, A.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Betterton, Henry B.
Harland, A.
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Reid, D. D. (County Down)


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Remer, J. R.


Brass, Captain W.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Briscoe, Richard George
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hilton, Cecil
Ropner, Major L.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Holt, Captain H. P.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Rye, F. G.


Bullock, Captain M.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Burman, J. B.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Campbell, E. T.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hurd, Percy A.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A.D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)


Chapman, Sir S.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Christie, J. A.
Jephcott, A. R.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Smithers, Waldron


Colfox, Major William Phillips
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cooper, A. Duff
King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Copper, J. B.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Crawturd, H. E.
Knox, Sir Alfred
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Lamb, J. Q.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Storry-Deans, R.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Long, Major Eric
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Curzon, Captain viscount
Lougher, Lewis
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Templeton, W. P.


Davidson, Major. General Sir J. H.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Herman
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Macdonald, sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Tomlinson, R. P.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Dawson, Sir Philip
MacIntyre, Ian
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Dixey, A. C
McLean, Major A.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hill)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Edge, Sir William
Macquisten, F. A.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Edmondson, Major A. J.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Margesson, Captain D.
Wells, S. R.


England, Colonel A.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Fenby, T. D.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Fielder, E. B.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Womersley, W. J.


Ford, Sir P. J.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.



Fraser, Captain Ian
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Major Sir George Hennessy and


Ganzoni, sir John
Nelson, Sir Frank
Major Sir William Cope.


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Neville, Sir Reginald J.



NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hirst, G. H.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Duncan, C.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Ammon, Charles George
Gardner, J. P.
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Barnes, A.
Gibbins, Joseph
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)


Barr, J.
Gillett, George M.
Kelly, W. T.


Batey, Joseph
Gosling, Harry
Kennedy, T.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Greenall, T.
Lansbury, George


Broad, F. A.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lawrence, Susan


Bromfield, William
Groves, T.
Lawson, John James


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Grundy, T. W.
Lee, F.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Lindley, F. W.


Charlatan, H. C.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Lunn, William


Compton, Joseph
Hardie, George D.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)


Dalton, Hugh
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Mackinder, W.


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Sitch, Charles H.
Viant, S. P.


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Skelton, A. N.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Murnin, H.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Oliver, George Harold
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Wellock, Wilfred


Paling, W.
Snell, Harry
Westwood, J.


Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Potts, John S.
Stephen, Campbell
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Windsor, Walter


Sakiatvala, Shapurji
Sutton, J. E.
Wright, W.


Scrymgeour, E.
Thurtle, Ernest
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Sexton, James
Tinker, John Joseph



Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Townend, A. E.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Whiteley.


Bill read a Second time, and committed to a Standing Committee.

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.

Orders of the Day — EDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENTS (SCOTLAND) BILL [Lords].

Order for Second Reading read.

Sir J. GILMOUR: I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."
My colleague from Scotland will recollect that two years ago, when we were discussing the problem of rating, I gave an undertaking in the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills that I would take steps to set up an Executive Commission to inquire into the condition of all educational trusts in Scotland. Following upon that, in April last year, I appointed a representative Departmental Committee as a preliminary to further procedure. That Committee has reported, and they ascertained that there were considerable sums of money in regard to which we desired a decision. The Committee, under the chairmanship of Lord Mackenzie, heard evidence from all the interested parties, and submitted a unanimous report last autumn. The report entirely corroborates our opinion that there is urgent need for a change. A large sum of money is involved, amounting to an annual value of £200,000 in 1882, and over £250,000 now. It is certain that that large sum of money is not always being spent to the best advantage, there having been, of course, as the House knows, many changes, administrative and legislative, since the last Endowments Commission was appointed nearly half a century ago. Fees have been abolished entirely in primary schools, and to a very large extent in secondary schools. Secondary education has made, of course, great advancement. Then there have been Education Acts, particularly those of 1908 and 1918. Where
there were nearly 1,000 school boards, there are now 37 education authorities. Perhaps the most important point, from our immediate point of view, is that a great system of bursaries has been established, applicable to all the higher stages of education, and provided from public funds. In the financial year ended 15th May, 1927, the authorities spent no less than £263,000 on bursaries. All these considerations show that an examination of the situation is imperative.
We have followed quite closely the example of the previous Commission, plus the unanimous recommendations of the Committee which we set up. All I would say to hon. Members to-night is that I hope they will give this Measure a Second Reading without much discussion, in order that we may take it to the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills, where I undertake to give the fullest consideration to all points which they desire to raise. I believe this Measure is earnestly desired by the educational interests of Scotland, and I recognise that hon. Members would like to be satisfied that there are safeguards which would protect the proper use of these funds, and I think I shall be able to satisfy them that we shall give every consideration to proposals that may be put forward. Already, there has been considerable discussion between the head of my Department in Scotland and the interests concerned, and I am satisfied that this is a change which is desirable from the point of view of educational interests in Scotland.

Mr. WESTWOOD: After the assurance given by the Secretary of State that the necessary Amendments to this Bill will receive due consideration I feel sure there will be no desire to oppose the Second Reading. There is no doubt in the minds of those associated with their administration that the money arising from some of these endowments could be
applied in other directions in a manner which would be carrying out the spirit of the original donor. As one who has had some little part in the negotiations I can testify that we have been fairly met by the heads of the Department and by the Secretary of State. Though some of the points are matters for Committee, it is worth while pointing out here that Clause 3 (1, a) does not make it clear that where new schemes are being prepared to replace existing schemes the Commissioners must give consideration to the original intentions of the donor. I understand that as a result of negotiations, there is an understanding that the paragraph will be made more explicit when the Bill is in Committee. Further, Clause 4 (1, b) excepts from the purview of the Commissioners the university endowments. But there are also endowments in Scotland which are set aside specifically for university purposes. I have in mind a scheme which has just been approved by a body of governors and by an education authority which sets aside a certain sum of money which can be used only for one purpose, namely, the provision of bursaries at St. Andrews or other Scottish universities; and those associated with the endowments would like to see even these particular endowments left clear of the purview of the Commissioners; but I admit this is a matter for discussion in Committee. In Clause 9 certain words are omitted which were in the 1882 Act, namely:
so far as applicable or applied to educational purposes.
I have in mind two types of endowment in Scotland. One is the endowment dealing wholly with education, and the other is the endowment which may deal partly with education and partly with charity. In the Kirkcaldy district, for instance, we have an important trust fund, part of which is used for educational purposes and another part for feeding and clothing the poor people. Then there is the Morgan Trust, which is one of the finest educational trusts in Scotland. It has an annual income of £3,250, of which £2,350 is used for charitable purposes, providing boots and clothing, so that the poor children may be kept in a healthier condition and be enabled to derive greater benefits from education. There is a desire on the part of certain governors associated with this particular endowment
that, so far as the charitable side of the trust is concerned, they should be allowed to continue their schemes without interference. I do not say that that is altogether desirable, but I am submitting the view of those who have asked me to refer to this particular subject.
Another point I want to mention is the provision made under Clause 28 allowing education authorities to submit single schemes dealing with all the endowments under their control. In the case of Fife, we have 29 endowment schemes which could be managed quite well under one scheme, instead of having 29 audits and 29 different managing bodies, I sincerely hope that the Second Beading of this Measure will be carried unanimously, and that in the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills we shall be able to hammer out any little differences.

Mr. COWAN: I think the Measure which we are now considering is one which will receive a hearty welcome in every part of the House. The Report of the Departmental Committee has clearly shown that it is not only desirable, but absolutely necessary in the interests of efficiency that there should be a revision of the various endowment schemes in Scotland. The powers which it is proposed to confer on the Commissioners under the Bill are very considerable, but I believe that in order to achieve the full purpose intended it will be necessary still to further enlarge those powers in some respects. We have the assurance of the Secretary of State for Scotland that he will be quite willing to consider any representations of that kind. There is one question which I wish to ask. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman can answer it now or whether it will be more convenient for him to answer it during the Committee stage. I want to know when the right hon. Gentleman will be able to give the names of the Commissioners whom it is proposed to appoint. I am sure every hon. Member of the House would be much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman if he would publish that information as soon as possible.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: My colleague in the representation of Dundee (Mr. Johnston) was unfortunately unable to be present at our meeting with the representatives of the Morgan Trust, but I was very glad to hear of his approval of
the suggested Amendments. I should have expected the Secretary of State to state more explicitly that he had been reviewing those suggested Amendments. The hon. Member for Peebles (Mr. Westwood) has mentioned their main features, and I should have thought that, during this brief consideration of the Bill on Second Reading, the right hon. Gentleman might have touched upon some of them and let us know whether he is in agreement with them. The representatives of the Morgan Trust, while they feel that there is no particular necessity for any change, are quite agreeable to the majority of the suggested Amendments put forward by the representatives of the various endowments involved in the fulfilment of the general undertaking, and perhaps in particular the right hon. Gentleman might say whether there is a scheme in reference to Clause 3 (1), and what assurance there will be that the purpose of the founder will be carefully reserved. I am quite willing that the Bill should receive a Second Reading, but should be glad if a more definite statement could be made now as to the right hon. Gentleman's views regarding the suggested Amendments.

Sir J. GILMOUR: I think it would be very undesirable, at this stage of the Bill, to go into details in regard to the suggested Amendments. I have assured the House that we will give full consideration to them, following on the discussions that have already passed between my Department and the interests concerned. With regard to the question which has been put to me as to the composition of the Commission, perhaps I might give the names to the House, and I hope that they will be accepted as representative of the various districts of Scotland. The following have consented to serve: The Earl of Elgin; Sheriff Fenton, who has particular legal knowledge, which is desirable on these questions; the Hon. Lady Hope, who served on the Committee and who represents the women's side; Mr. Joseph Duncan, who also served on the inquiry, and has wide knowledge of the matters involved; Professor Gray of Aberdeen, representing the North of Scotland;
Mr. John Roxburgh, representing the West of Scotland; and Sir Alexander Wright, the general manager of the Royal Bank of Scotland, representing the Edinburgh district. Mr. Roxburgh also sat on the Committee of Inquiry, and has taken a great interest in these matters. I hope that the House will believe that this is a very strong Commission, and, will, therefore, have confidence in it.

Orders of the Day — EDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENTS (SCOTLAND) [EXPENSES].

Considered in Committee under Standing Order No. 71A.

[Captain BOURNE in the Chair.]

Resolved,
That it is expedient, in pursuance of any Act of the present Session to make further provision for the reorganisation of educational and other endowments in Scotland, to authorise the payment out of moneys to be provided by Parliament of such sums as may be necessary to defray the expenses incurred by any Commissioners appointed thereunder, and to remunerate their Secretary, Assistant Commissioners, and other officers."—(King's recommendation signified.)—[Sir J. Gilmour.]

Resolution to be reported To-morrow.

Orders of the Day — MARRIAGE (PROHIBITED DEGREES OF RELATIONSHIP) BILL.

Considered in Committee, and reported, without Amendment; read the Third time, and passed.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

It being after Half-past Eleven of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Ten Minutes before Twelve o'Clock.